Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.28 seconds)Sanjay Chandra vs Cbi on 23 November, 2011
"This Court in Sanjay Chandra vs. Central Bureau of
Investigation (2012) 1 SCC 40, also involving an economic
offence of formidable magnitude, while dealing with the issue
of grant of bail, had observed that deprivation of liberty must
be considered a punishment unless it is required to ensure
that an accused person would stand his trial when called
upon and that the courts owe more than verbal respect to the
principle that punishment begins after conviction and that
every man is deemed to be innocent until duly tried and
found guilty. It was underlined that the object of bail is
neither punitive nor preventive. This Court sounded a caveat
that any imprisonment before conviction has a substantial
punitive content and it would be improper for any court to
refuse bail as a mark of disapproval of a conduct whether an
accused has been convicted for it or not or to refuse bail to an
unconvicted person for the purpose of giving him a taste of
imprisonment as a lesson. It was enunciated that since the
jurisdiction to grant bail to an accused pending trial or in
appeal against conviction is discretionary in nature, it has to
be exercised with care and caution by balancing the valuable
right of liberty of an individual and the interest of the society
in general. It was elucidated that the seriousness of the
charge, is no doubt one of the relevant considerations while
examining the application of bail but it was not only the test
or the factor and that grant or denial of such privilege, is
regulated to a large extent by the facts and circumstances of
each particular case. That detention in custody of under-trial
prisoners for an indefinite period would amount to violation
of Article 21 of the Constitution was highlighted."
Prasanta Kumar Sarkar vs Ashis Chatterjee & Anr on 29 October, 2010
12. The Apex Court in Prasanta Kumar Sarkar versus
Ashis Chatterjee and another (2010) 14 SCC 496, has laid
.
Section 21 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 37 in The Narcotic Drugs And Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 [Entire Act]
Section 436 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 439 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Dataram Singh vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 6 February, 2018
8. Recently, the Hon'ble Apex Court in Criminal Appeal
No. 227/2018, Dataram Singh vs. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr
decided on 6.2.2018 has held that freedom of an individual can
not be curtailed for indefinite period, especially when his/her
guilt is yet to be proved. It has further held by the Hon'ble Apex
Court in the aforesaid judgment that a person is believed to be
innocent until found guilty. The Hon'ble Apex Court has held as
under:
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Manoranjana Sinh @ Gupta vs Central Bureau Of Investigation on 6 February, 2017
In Manoranjana Sinh alias Gupta versus CBI,
(2017) 5 SCC 218, Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under:
1