SHOULD ACCUSED ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL TAKE REGULAR BAIL ON FILING OF CHARGE-SHEET?

    Supreme Court, Delhi High Court, Advocate, Legal, Law,


Generally, on the filing of charge-sheet, Ld Trial Court directs the accused to surrender and again seek bail, failing which he has to go in jail. This is a tricky situation as grant/ refusal of bail is dependent on the Will of the Trial Court.


IS REGULAR BAIL REQUIRED FOR ACCUSED ON ANTICIPATORY BAIL  


Thankfully, Supreme Court has finally resolved the situation by concluding that there is no need to seek Bail on the filing of charge-sheet, if accused is already on Bail.


Hon’ble Supreme Court in the matter of Sushila Aggarwal and Ors. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors. on 29.01.2020 concluded as follows :- 


The analogy to ‘deemed bail’ under section with anticipatory bail leads this Court to conclude that the mere subsequent event of the filing of a charge-sheet cannot compel the accused to surrender and seek regular bail. As a matter of fact, interestingly, if indeed, if a charge-sheet is filed where the accused is on anticipatory bail, the normal implication be that there was no occasion for the investigating agency or the police to require his custody, because there would have been nothing in his behaviour requiring such a step.


In case, you need any clarification/ assistance/ help, please feel free to contact me on my whatsapp number. I will be happy if you can leave your comments.


MY GOOGLE MAP LOCATION



Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

WILL PROCEEDINGS START DE-NOVO OR CONTINUE IN CASE OF RETURN OF PLAINT UNDER ORDER 7 CPC?

Image
      Order 7 and Return of Plaint is one of the fundamental objections taken by Defense Counsel in Civil Litigation. In case of return of Plaint from a Court lacking inherent Jurisdiction to the court of appropriate Jurisdiction, a moot question arises for consideration is whether the proceedings shall start “De-Novo” (fresh) or it will be a continuance of the earlier proceedings ?   There has been a difference of opinion even in Supreme Court and therefore the matter was referred to a larger bench. The Issue is now settled in the matter of  EXL Careers Vs. Frankfinn Aviation Services  Private Limited    decided on 05-08-2020 as follows :-    (1) The proceedings will start afresh (DE-NOVO) and NO cognizance of  proceedings or earlier court will be considered.   (2) For the purpose of limitation, Plaintiff is entitled to exclude the period during which he prosecuted the case before the court having no jurisdiction.   ...
Read more

BORROWER LIABLE TO PAY INTEREST EVEN WHEN LENDER REFUSES TO ACCEPT PAYMENT

Image
      The Common understanding is if Lender has refused to accept the repayment of Loan, then the Borrower’s Liability to pay the interest ceases from the date of such refusal. However, this does not seems to be the correct proposition of Law.  In an recent judgment titled Balwinder Singh Vs. Mithoot Finance (P) Limited and Ors Ld National Consumer Dispute REdressal Commission (NCDRC), (Revision Petition No. 2194 of 2015, Decided On: 23.07.2020 ) refused to accept the argument of the Borrower that he has tendered to repay and imposed an interest on the borrower even for the period subsequent to the said offer to repay.   While coming to this conclusion , LD NCDRC relied on the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Alok Shanker Pandey Vs. Union of India &Ors. , II (2007) CPJ 3 (SC) has observed as under:-  “9. It may be mentioned that there is misconception about interest. Interest is not a penalty or punishment at all, but it is the normal...
Read more

DOES ANTICIPATORY BAIL EXPIRES AFTER FIXED TIME OR ACCUSED’S APPEARANCE BEFORE COURT?

Image
                      Many Courts, without recording reasons, are granting Anticipatory Bail for a limited period e.g. till accused’s appearance before Trial Court or say 2 months.  EXPIRY OF ANTICIPATORY BAIL   Different High Courts holds different opinion on the subject. Finally this issue is decided by Supreme Court in the matter of Sushila Aggarwal and Ors. Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) and Ors. on 29.01.2020, wherein Supreme Court concluded that – Generally, Anticipatory Bail cannot be linked either with Time Frame or with the happening of certain event i.e., Court shall NOT fix a time frame while granting Anticipatory Bail or link it with appearance of accused before Trial Court or any other event.   In case, you need any clarification/ assistance/ help, please feel free to contact me on my whatsapp number. I will be happy if you can leave your comments. MY GOOGLE MAP LOCATION
Read more