IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
VINOD DIWAKAR
Bacchi Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. understanding of the applicant's case against the allegations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. liability for selling counterfeit goods. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. discussion on legal grounds for dismissing charges. (Para 5) |
| 4. concerns over judicial custody and immediate trials. (Para 6 , 8) |
| 5. examination of procedural deficiencies in bail applications. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14) |
| 6. reaffirmation of existing judicial principles on anticipatory bail. (Para 20) |
| 7. anticipatory bail jurisprudence and its legal framework. (Para 21 , 22 , 25 , 30) |
| 8. upholding the right to liberty via effective bail guidelines. (Para 36 , 38) |
| 9. procedural directives regarding bail submissions. (Para 49 , 50) |
| 10. conclusion allowing the applicant to proceed without arrest. (Para 52) |
JUDGMENT :
Vinod Diwakar, J.
1. Heard Shri Satyaveer Singh, learned Amicus Curiae, along with learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State-respondent, and perused the material available on record.
2. The applicant has challenged the summoning order dated 29.04.2022 passed in Case No. 10849 of 2022, which is pending trial before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur. The applicant has also prayed to quash the
State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal
Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab
Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT of Delhi)
Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra
Salauddin Abdulsamad Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra
Adri Dhran Das v. State of West Bengal
Nirmal Jeet Kaur v. State of M.P.
Satpal Singh v. State of Punjab
Naresh Kumar Yadav v. Ravindra Kumar
Joginder Kumar v. State of U.P.
Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar
Satender Kumar Antil v. CBI and another
Jasbir Singh v. State of Punjab
Motiram v. State of Madhya Pradesh
The court ruled that an accused charged without prior arrest may appear and secure release by furnishing a bail bond, with no requirement for anticipatory bail, aligning with precedents that protect ....
(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....
(1) Anticipatory bail – Once anticipatory bail is granted, it ordinarily continues without fixed expiry – Filing of charge-sheet, taking of cognizance, or issuance of summons does not terminate prote....
Anticipatory bail applications are maintainable even if the petitioner is already in custody for another case, affirming the protection of personal liberty under Article 21.
Anticipatory bail petitions are maintainable for offences with a penalty of up to seven years, and jurisdictional courts must adjudicate these applications rather than merely disposing them without c....
Anticipatory bail application – There is no restriction in text of Section 438 or scheme of Cr.P.C. precluding a person from seeking anticipatory bail in relation to an offence while being in custody....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.