Back
BELA M. TRIVEDI, SATISH CHANDRA SHARMA
Rajanti Devi @ Rajanti Kumari – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER
1. The Miscellaneous Application has come up for consideration on the compliance report submitted by the Registry alongwith its office report.
2. On 28.11.2023, this Court had passed the following order:
Permission as sought for is granted.
The Special Leave Petition is dismissed as withdrawn.
However, during the course of hearing, it has been brought to our notice by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the High Court (Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Kumar) had heard the matter and reserved the same for orders on 07.04.2022 and had released the matter as per the order dated 04.04.2023 i.e. almost after one year. We are extremely surprised as to how the order on the petition seeking anticipatory bail could be kept pending for one year.
The Registrar General of the High Court of Judicature at Patna may get the details of the matter and submit the report before 08.01.2024.
List the matter before this Bench on 08.01.2024 for compliance only.”
Anticipatory bail applications / bail applications – Such matters pertaining to personal liberty shall be taken up and decided at the earliest.
The Supreme Court emphasized the necessity of timely consideration of bail applications, balancing personal liberty with the requirement of merit-based decisions.
In matters involving personal liberty, expeditious consideration of applications for anticipatory bail is crucial, and interim protection may be granted until the main application is disposed of.
(1) Bail application – Speedy disposal – Bail and anticipatory applications must be decided expeditiously on their own merits, without relegating parties to a state of indefinite pendency – High Cour....
The Supreme Court emphasized that anticipatory bail should not be misconstrued as a norm and cautioned against granting ad interim relief that essentially provides final outcomes pending full hearing....
Anticipatory bail – Specious reason of change in circumstances cannot be invoked for successive anticipatory bail applications, once it is rejected by a speaking order and that too by same Judge.
If a judgment is not pronounced within a period of six months, it should be placed before another Bench for fresh arguments – There is no question of pronouncement of judgment now by same Bench.
The High Court's jurisdiction in dealing with the application for grant of anticipatory bail is limited to the cause of the concerned applicant, and it is not open to the High Court to add third part....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
