Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Scanned Judgements…!
Checking relevance for In Re: Destruction of Public & Private Properties VS State of A. P. ...
In Re: Destruction of Public & Private Properties VS State of A. P. - 2009 3 Supreme 557 : Under the PDPP Act, bail is not a matter of right. The court’s discretion to grant bail to persons charged under s.3(1) is restricted to cases where there are reasonable grounds to presume the accused is not guilty, in line with Section 437 of the CrPC. Therefore, an accused who has been in custody for 7 days is not automatically entitled to bail; bail may be granted only if the court is satisfied of such reasonable grounds.Checking relevance for Kodungallur Film Society VS Union of India...
Kodungallur Film Society VS Union of India - 2018 0 Supreme(SC) 961 : The PDPP Act does not give an automatic right to bail for a Section 3(1) offence. Bail is at the court’s discretion and may be granted only if the court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty. The court may impose conditions such as the accused depositing security equal to the quantified loss caused or furnishing other security. This reflects the restriction under Section 437 of the CrPC and the Committee’s recommendation that bail for public‑property‑destruction offences be granted only on such terms, irrespective of the length of custody (e.g., 7 days).Checking relevance for Central Bureau Of Investigation, Special Investigation Cell 1, New Delhi VS Anupam J. Kulkarni...
Checking relevance for Jigar @ Jimmy Pravinchandra Adatiya VS State of Gujarat...
Checking relevance for V. Senthil Balaji VS State Represented By Deputy Director...
V. Senthil Balaji VS State Represented By Deputy Director - 2023 8 Supreme 269 : Section 167(2) of the CrPC provides that a statutory right to bail (default bail) arises only after the maximum period of police custody (15 days) and the total period of custody (60 or 90 days, depending on the offence) has elapsed. For an accused who has been in custody for only 7 days, no automatic entitlement to bail exists; bail may be sought but is subject to the discretion of the court.Checking relevance for Dhanraj Aswani VS Amar S. Mulchandani...
Checking relevance for Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation...
Satender Kumar Antil VS Central Bureau of Investigation - 2022 7 Supreme 641 : Under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code the accused is entitled to default bail if the investigating agency fails to complete the investigation within the statutory period (60 days for offences punishable up to ten years, 90 days for more serious offences). Bail applications must be disposed of within two weeks, and even for cognizable offences arrest is not mandatory; the accused may seek bail under Section 439/167(2) irrespective of the fact that he has been in police custody for 7 days.Checking relevance for NITHIN GOPI S/O GOPINATHAN PILLA VS STATE OF KERALA...
NITHIN GOPI S/O GOPINATHAN PILLA VS STATE OF KERALA - 2024 0 Supreme(Ker) 1553 : Under the Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act (PDPP), Section 5 states that a person accused of an offence punishable under S.3 (such as attacking police and damaging a police jeep) cannot be released on bail unless the prosecution is given an opportunity to oppose the bail application. The court may still grant bail, but it will usually impose strict conditions, for example requiring the accused to deposit the amount of damage caused to the Government as a condition of bail.
