Back
AJAY BHANOT
Arman – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Ajay Bhanot, J.)
1. Matter is taken up in the revised call.
2. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the applicant is taken in the record.
3. By means of the bail application the applicant has prayed to be enlarged on bail in Case Crime No.93 of 2021 at Police Station-Etmadpur, District-Agra under Section 2/3 of the Uttar Pradesh Gangster Act. The applicant is in jail since 13.09.2020.
4. The bail application of the applicant was rejected by the learned trial court on 09.07.2024.
5. The following arguments made by Shri Ali Jamal Khan, learned amicus curiae on behalf of the applicant, which could not be satisfactorily refuted by Shri Paritosh Kumar Malviya, learned AGA-I from the record, entitle the applicant for grant of bail:
II. The applicant has e
The right to bail cannot be undermined by arbitrary surety demands, particularly for marginalized individuals, necessitating consideration of socioeconomic status by trial courts.
Bail amounts should depend on the accused's financial circumstances, prioritizing personal bonds over sureties to prevent undue hardship.
The discretion of the court in accepting the same set of sureties in multiple cases and the emphasis on the competency and reliability of sureties.
The right to legal aid is essential for ensuring timely access to bail for marginalized prisoners, emphasizing the constitutional obligation to uphold personal liberty.
A person may provide sureties for multiple accused in different cases under BNS provisions, provided the property value exceeds the aggregate surety requirement.
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
