cites: 191987598

1 - 10 of 13 (1.03 seconds)

Jagga @ Jagir @ Dashrath Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 2 December, 2019 cites

Jagga @ Jagir @ Dashrath Gurjar vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 21 November, 2019

THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH M.Cr.C. No. 48206/2019 (Jagga @ Jageer @ Dashrath Gurjar Vs. State of M.P.)

Madhya Pradesh High Court Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - R K Shrivastava - Full Document

Emperor vs H.L. Hutchinson on 23 April, 1931

Reference was also made to Emperor v. Hutchinson [1931 SCC OnLine All 14] wherein it was observed that grant of bail is the rule and refusal is the exception. The provision for bail is therefore age-old and the liberal interpretation to the provision for bail is almost a century old, going back to colonial days.

Allahabad High Court Cites 1 - Cited by 166 - Full Document

Anil Kumar Sharma vs State Of H.P on 12 October, 2015

The Apex Court further observed in the case of Anil Sharma Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh, (1997) 3 Crimes 135 (HP) which reads as under:-

Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 8 - Cited by 32 - S Thakur - Full Document

Mansab Ali vs Irsan And Another on 13 December, 2002

In Mansab Ali Vs. Irsan, AIR 2003 SC 707, it is observed as under:-

Supreme Court of India Cites 4 - Cited by 44 - Full Document

Dataram Singh vs The State Of Uttar Pradesh on 6 February, 2018

In Dataram Singh Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and another reported in (2018) 3 SCC 22, the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:

Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 35378 - M B Lokur - Full Document

Nikesh Tarachand Shah vs Union Of India on 23 November, 2017

6. The historical background of the provision for bail has been elaborately and lucidly explained in a recent decision delivered in NikeshTarachand Shah v. Union of India [(2018) 11 SCC 1] going back to the days of the Magna Carta.

Supreme Court of India Cites 101 - Cited by 1782 - R F Nariman - Full Document