Back
GITA GOPI
Kadarsha Latifsha Saiyed Thro Jamilsha Kadarsha Saiyed – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent – State.
2. By way of this application filed under Section 379 and 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to in short as ‘Cr.P.C.’), the challenge is made to the legality and validity of the order dated 07.06.2024 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Mandvi, Kutch in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.166 of 2024 whereby the application preferred by the respondent authority under Section 439(2) of the Cr.P.C. came to be allowed and the regular bail granted in favour of the applicant was cancelled. Further, the applicant alongwith the other co-accused were ordered to be taken into custody and an amount of Rs.1,00,000/- deposited as per the suspension of condition for a limited period was ordered to be forfeited. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the same, the applicant has come in this Criminal Revision Application contending the impugned order passed is unjust, improper and against the settled legal position of law.
3. As per the facts of the case, an First Information Report (FIR) came to be file
Bail should not be cancelled without substantial justification, and courts must consider the circumstances surrounding compliance with bail conditions.
(1) Cancellation of bail – Bail once granted should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering whether any supervening circumstances have rendered it no longer conducive to a fair tr....
Bail cancellation requires clear evidence of breach or supervening circumstances; implied conditions cannot justify cancellation.
The accused's indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and the importance of considering supervening circumstances justifying the cancellation of bail.
The court has the authority to cancel bail if the order suffers from serious infirmities resulting in miscarriage of justice, and if the accused misuses their liberty, interferes with the investigati....
Bail should not be cancelled without clear evidence of violation of conditions or misuse of liberty, as established by the court's analysis.
Bail may be cancelled if the accused violates conditions by engaging in further criminal activity, with the court needing to assess the seriousness and context of such violations.
Cancellation of bail requires compelling evidence of misconduct or supervening circumstances affecting fairness of trial; mere subsequent offenses do not suffice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the misuse of bail and the legal principles governing the cancellation of bail.
Cancellation of bail requires substantial grounds indicating misuse or misconduct; mere allegations of injustice without evidence do not suffice for revocation.
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
