Supreme Court Half Yearly Complete Criminal Digest 2025

Arrest Criminal Law - Arrest - Defiance of Court Order - Grant of Bail - Police, with knowledge of the protection order, hastily added serious charges under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 and the Vishesh Jan Suraksha Adhiniyam, 2005 leading to the appellant's arrest. The Court deprecated this conduct, emphasizing that the police should have sought leave from the Court before arresting the appellant. The Court, considering the mala fide nature of the arrest, allowed the appeal, directing the appellant's release on bail, and made the interim order of protection absolute. (Para 5 & 7) Manish Rathore v. State of Chhattisgarh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 325 Guidelines - Petition alleging police high-handedness and violation of arrest guidelines under Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 73 - Court finds evident police misconduct but closes proceedings as a related police case is pending - Cautions police officers and directs Director General of Police, Haryana, to prevent recurrence - Expresses concern over mechanical compliance with Section 41(1)(b)(ii) CrPC checklist - Reiterates Constitutional and statutory safeguards for individuals in custody, referencing D.K. Basu and Somnath v. State of Maharashtra, 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 252 - Order circulated to all Directors General of Police and Commissioners for strict adherence to arrest and custody guidelines. (Para 6, 9 & 16) Vijay Pal Yadav v. Mamta Singh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 380 Bail Anticipatory Bail - Condition for Automatic Custody Upon Charge-Sheet Submission - Such a specific direction, mandating coercive steps for custody, was improper. When granting anticipatory bail, the court should leave it open for the trial court to decide on bail after the charge-sheet is filed and the accused appears. (Para 3) Ritesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 326 Anticipatory Bail – Investigation was completed and the charge sheet was filed - Investigating Officer did not arrest the petitioner during the investigation phase, and the Court had issued summons for the petitioner's appearance. The Court expressed disapproval of the practice in Uttar Pradesh where arrests are made post-charge sheet filing and cognizance by the Court, deeming it illogical. The Court held that once the investigation is complete and the charge sheet is filed, the accused should appear before the trial court and furnish bail. Musheer Alam v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 83 Bail Application – Moratorium of 1 year imposed by high court to apply for bail afresh - Such a restriction was impermissible. (Para 3) Md. Gulzar v. State of Bihar, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 370 Bail is a matter of judicial discretion and must be exercised in accordance with established principles rather than subjective considerations. The courts must avoid unnecessary incarceration, particularly when the alleged offense does not involve extreme violence or grave societal impact. The denial of bail in non-heinous offenses contributes to the overburdening of higher courts with bail applications. Maulvi Syed Shad Kazmi @ Mohd. Shad v. State of Uttar Pradesh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 114 Case Delayed by 27 Adjournments in High Court - Prompt Adjudication in Matters of Personal Liberty - The Supreme Court granted bail to the petitioner, incarcerated for over four years, due to the High Court's repeated adjournment of the bail application on 27 occasions. The High Courts must not indefinitely delay matters concerning personal liberty. Noting that the complainant's evidence was recorded and only three of 365 witnesses had been examined, the Court deemed the pending High Court bail application infructuous and granted bail, despite opposition from the CBI citing the petitioner's involvement in 33 other cases. The Court emphasized the need for timely judicial action in cases impacting personal liberty. (Para 5) Lakshya Tawar v. Central Bureau of Investigation, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 612 Cancellation of Bail - Held, Personal liberty is a fundamental constitutional right, and courts must exercise caution before restricting it. No evidence was found of the accused misusing bail, influencing witnesses, tampering with evidence, or causing undue delay. The High Court's cancellation of bail was unjustified, as it erroneously conducted a mini-trial. Bail restored, with a direction for the appellant to appear before the Trial Court, failing which the bail may be cancelled. Appeal allowed. [Para 12, 13] Kailash Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh, 2025 LiveLaw (SC) 242 Criminal Law – Bail – Suspension of Sentence – Custodial Death – Expedited Appeal - Supreme Court refuses to suspend life sentence or grant bail to expelled IPS officer Sanjiv Bhatt in 1990 custodial death case; directs expeditious hearing of appeal. The Supreme Court holds no inclination to enlarge appellant on bail; observations limited to bail application...

Supreme Court Half Yearly Complete Criminal Digest 2025

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags