SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

DALVEER BHANDARI,K.S. PANICKER RADHAKRISHNAN, , ,
SIDDHARAM SATLINGAPPA MHETRE – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF MAHARASHTRA . – Respondent


Advocates:
A. RAGHUNATHRAJIV SHANKAR DVIVEDI

REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 2271 2010.

(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.7615 of 2009)

Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre

…..Appellant

Versus

State of Maharashtra and Others

…..Respondents

J U D G M E N T

Dalveer Bhandari, J.

1.

Leave granted.

2.

This appeal involves issues of great public importance

pertaining to the importance of individual’s personal liberty and

the society’s interest.

3.

The society has a vital interest in grant or refusal of bail

because every criminal offence is the offence against the State.

The order granting or refusing bail must reflect perfect balance

between the conflicting interests, namely, sanctity of individual

liberty and the interest of the society. The law of bails dovetails

two conflicting interests namely, on the one hand, the

requirements of shielding the society from the hazards of those

committing crimes and potentiality of repeating the same crime

while on bail and on the other hand absolute adherence of the

fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence regarding

presumption of innocence of an accused until he is found guilty

and t

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top