Begin typing your search above and press return to search.
Top Stories

Filing SLP Against Bail Rejection After Years 'Wrong Legal Advice'; Proper Course Is To Move HC For Bail : Supreme Court

Shruti Kakkar
26 Aug 2021 4:00 AM GMT
Filing SLP Against Bail Rejection After Years Wrong Legal Advice; Proper Course Is To Move HC For Bail : Supreme Court
x

The Supreme Court has observed that filing a special leave petition against the rejection of bail by the High Court after a long delay of years was illogical and the proper course would be to apply for bail before the High Court.The Court made this observation while hearing a petition filed after a delay of 1320 days against Allahabad High Court's 2016 order rejecting bail. A bench...

The Supreme Court has observed that filing a special leave petition against the rejection of bail by the High Court after a long delay of years was illogical and the proper course would be to apply for bail before the High Court.

The Court made this observation while hearing a petition filed after a delay of 1320 days against Allahabad High Court's 2016 order rejecting bail.

A bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy remarked that they failed to appreciate as to why a special leave petition was filed after the considerable delay.

"This is clearly wrong legal advice as the appropriate course would be to apply for bail before the High Court", the bench said.

The remarks came as the bench said that it was coming across a number of such cases where after years together, a special leave petition was filed against refusal of bail.

Background

The bench in the present matter was hearing an appeal against the Allahabad High Court order dated September 30, 2016, wherein the single bench of Justice Karuna Nand Bajpayee had rejected a plea seeking the release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 594 of 2014, u/s 498A, 304B I.P.C. and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station- Medical, District- Meerut.

"Looking at the nature of the offence, its gravity and the evidence in support of it and the overall circumstances of this case, this Court is of the view that the applicant has not made out a case for bail. Therefore, the prayer for bail of the applicant is rejected," the bench had remarked.

The applicant's counsel had contended that the allegations of demanding dowry and ill-treatment were wrong and the deceased committed suicide because of some domestic incompatibility with her husband as the husband was not so educated as the deceased was and she used to feel frustrated with this unequal marriage.

Opposing the plea, the AGA had contended that the applicant was the husband and the post mortem examination indicated one abraded contusion on the body of the deceased, apart from the ligature mark seen around the neck which indicates that the deceased was subjected to violence before her death.

It was also contended that the deceased died unnatural death under abnormal circumstances within four years of her marriage and there was no convincing adequate explanation as to why she did commit suicide.

"There is sufficient evidence on record to indicate not only demand for dowry but also cruel treatment which was meted out to her by the applicant and other family members and the applicant being husband was not only responsible for the safety and welfare of his wife but was also under heavy onus to explain her unnatural death taking place within the precincts of his own house. Even commission of suicide is death under abnormal circumstances and shall also come within the ambit of dowry death as has been settled by the Apex Court," AGA had argued while opposing the plea.

Case Title: Gopal v. State of UP

Click Here To Read/ Download Order


Next Story