AI Overview...
-
Aba Grant & Anticipatory Bail - Courts have considered the nature of allegations, including serious offences under Sections 302 and 326 IPC, when granting anticipatory bail. In some cases, the courts have refused bail due to the seriousness of the offence, the need for custodial interrogation, and pending interim relief applications. Several judgments highlight that the pendency of other matters or interim relief does not automatically warrant bail, especially in serious offences like murder or attempted murder Rohit Ram @ Rohit Kumar Ram VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand, RAFIQ CHAND SHAIKH Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Bombay, DATTATRAY PANDURANG KHANDEKAR Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Bombay.
-
Legal Findings on Sections 302 & 304 IPC - Multiple orders emphasize that the applicability of Sections 302 (murder) or 304 (culpable homicide not amounting to murder) IPC is often ruled out based on the facts, with courts expressing doubt about the findings of the High Court in specific cases. The need for custodial interrogation and the seriousness of the offence are key considerations in bail decisions Nagesh Rajshekhar Mense VS State of Maharashtra - Crimes, Nagesh Rajshekhar Mense VS State Of Maharashtra - Bombay, RAFIQ CHAND SHAIKH Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Bombay.
-
Case-specific Factors - In some cases, delays in project completion or compensation disputes under agreements like ABA are discussed, but these are generally separate from criminal bail considerations. The courts have also examined whether allegations are false or based on unsubstantiated claims, leading to acquittals or denial of bail Rasheed Ahmad Usmani VS DLF Ltd. (through its Chairman & MD) DLF Centre - Consumer, State of Rajasthan VS Ugma Ram, S/o. Shri Jaggannath - Rajasthan, Rupali Bahl VS Ireo Grace Realtech Private Limited - Consumer.
-
Judicial Approach & Conclusions - Courts tend to deny anticipatory bail in serious cases involving offences under Sections 302/304 IPC, citing the importance of custodial interrogation and the gravity of charges. When allegations are of a serious nature, bail is granted cautiously, and pendency of other proceedings or interim relief applications does not automatically justify bail Rohit Ram @ Rohit Kumar Ram VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand, DATTATRAY PANDURANG KHANDEKAR Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Bombay.
Summary: Courts in the US 302 context generally prioritize the gravity of offences, the need for investigation, and the specifics of each case over interim relief or procedural delays. The applicability of Sections 302 and 304 IPC is carefully examined, with bail being granted or refused based on the facts, seriousness of the offence, and the court's assessment of the risk involved.
References: - Rohit Ram @ Rohit Kumar Ram VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand - Nagesh Rajshekhar Mense VS State of Maharashtra - Crimes - Nagesh Rajshekhar Mense VS State Of Maharashtra - Bombay - Rasheed Ahmad Usmani VS DLF Ltd. (through its Chairman & MD) DLF Centre - Consumer - State of Rajasthan VS Ugma Ram, S/o. Shri Jaggannath - Rajasthan - Rupali Bahl VS Ireo Grace Realtech Private Limited - Consumer - RAFIQ CHAND SHAIKH Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Bombay - DATTATRAY PANDURANG KHANDEKAR Vs THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA - Bombay
Search Results for "Aba Grant in Us 302"
2017 0 Supreme(Jhk) 1283 • India - Jharkhand
RONGON MUKHOPADHYAY
petitioners sought anticipatory bail in connection with a case registered for offences under Sections 326, 302/34 of the Indian Penal ... Anticipatory Bail - Allegations of General and Omnibus Nature - Grant of Anticipatory Bail Fact of the Case: The ... Finding of the Court: The court considered the nature of the allegations and the fact that similar allegations had led to the grant ... Petitioners have prayed for grant of anticipatory bail, as they are apprehending their arrest in connection with Kowali P.S. Case No.....
• India - Crimes
PRAKASH D. NAIK
On this finding applicability of Section 302 or even that of Section 304 of I.P.C. is ruled out. The finding of the High Court on the facts situation is open to doubt. ... Bisht J.) of this Court dated 30.09.2021 passed in ABA No.944 of 2020 and other connected maters. Learned APP submitted that, merely on the ground of grant of interim relief in various other matters by the apex Court, no relief under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. can be granted. ... Pendency of some matters for grant of some interim relief is not allowing in ....
2023 0 Supreme(Bom) 1098 • India - Bombay
PRAKASH D. NAIK
On this finding applicability of Sec. 302 or even that of Sec. 304 of I.P.C. is ruled out. The finding of the High Court on the facts situation is open to doubt. ... Bisht J.) of this Court dtd. 30/9/2021 passed in ABA No.944 of 2020 and other connected maters. Learned APP submitted that, merely on the ground of grant of interim relief in various other matters by the apex Court, no relief under Sec. 438 of Cr.P.C. can be granted. ... Pendency of some matters for grant of some interim relief is not allowing in these appl....
• India - Consumer
DEEPA SHARMA, C.VISWANATH
is placed on record, clearly shows that the opposite parties had shown therein the delayed compensation calculated in terms of ABA ... produced by the complainants to prove that the cost of the project has in fact been reduced—It is also apparent from the terms of ABA ... agreement is ultra vires or amounts to unfair and restrictive trade practices—At the time when the complainants had entered into the ABA ... After the amount of Rs.3,55,677/-towards delay compensation as per ABA was credited in his account and thereafte....
2021 0 Supreme(Bom) 727 • India - Bombay
PRAKASH D.NAIK
The State of Maharashtra and others, ABA No.1599/2017, decided on 14-9-2017. ... State of Maharashtra (ABA No.1783 of 2018) (2018-SCC Online-Bom-20729), order dated 24th September 2019 passed in ABA No.2074 of 2019 in the case of Bhawanji Gala Vs. State of Maharashtra. The High Court of Karnataka has also granted similar protection in the case of Gameskraft Tchnologies Pvt. ... On perusal of order in Sandeep Lohariya's case, it is evident that the accused was involved in commission of offence under Sections 302, 120B, 34....
• India - Consumer
RAM SURAT RAM MAURYA, INDER JIT SINGH
CD-A6-03-302 ... As per clause-13.5 of the ABA, the developer is entitled for one year as “extended period” and the claim for refund was pre-mature. The complainant can claim refund only after 27.11.2019, in case the developer, failed to offer possession till then. ... The delay in issue of “occupation certificate” was beyond the control of the developer and is a force majeure as provided in Clause-13.3 and 13.6 of the ABA. The developer is entitled for extension of the period, for which “occupation certificate” is being delayed.
2024 0 Supreme(Raj) 787 • India - Rajasthan
PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, MUNNURI LAXMAN
State of Bihar [1996 (1) SCC 614] (c) Vishvas Aba Kurane Vs. ... Ugma Ram & Ors.), whereby the accused respondents were acquitted for the offence under Sections 148, 302, 302/149, 323 & 323/149 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. ... However, during trial the said allegation against the accused-respondents were found to be false, and thus, vide the impugned judgment, the accused- respondents were acquitted of the offence under Sections 148, 302, 302/149, 323 & 323/149 IPC. 11. ... This Court further observes t....
• India - Bombay High Court - Bench at Aurangabad
PRAKASH D. NAIK, J
Since the Court was not inclined to grant relief, learned Advocates, on instructions, seek permission to withdraw ABA No.1365/2021, ABA No. 1487/2021, ABA No. 1160/2021, ABA No.1233/2021, ABA No. 1375/2021 and ABA No. 1363/2021. In view of submissions, they are allowed to withdraw the applications. ... On this finding applicability of Section 302 or even that of Section 304 of I.P.C. is ruled out. The finding of the High Court on the facts situation ....
2023 Supreme(Online)(Bom) 14563 • India - Bombay High Court
PRAKASH D. NAIK, J
On this finding applicability of Section 302 or even that of Section 304 of I.P.C. is ruled out. The finding of the High Court on the facts situation is open to doubt. ... Pendency of some matters for grant of some interim relief is not allowing in these applications. The applicant is involved in this case. The offence is of serious nature. Custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary. ... Learned APP submitted that, no ground is made out for grant of anticipatory bail. The delay has been explained in the FIR. The applicant was ....
• India - Bombay High Court
Prakash D. Naik, J
On this finding applicability of Section 302 or even that of Section 304 of I.P.C. is ruled out. The finding of the High Court on the facts situation is open to doubt. ... Pendency of some matters for grant of some interim relief is not allowing in these applications. The applicant is involved in this case. The offence is of serious nature. Custodial interrogation of the applicant is necessary. ... Learned APP submitted that, no ground is made out for grant of anticipatory bail. The delay has been explained in the FIR. The applicant was ....
Filter by Legal Phrase
