Rajasthan HC rejects Bail to REET Paper Leak Accused Ram Kripal Meena
Allahabad HC Reserves Verdict on Muslim Parties' Plea Against Varanasi Court Order
Jharkhand HC Announces 55 Assistant Positions in Ranchi; Online Applications Now Open!
Sister-in-Law's Frequent Visits Insufficient to Establish Residence in DV Case : Bombay HC
P&H HC Grants Interim Bail to Eight-Month Pregnant Woman Accused in Murder Case, Citing Health Risks to Mother and Unborn Child
Kerala HC Denies 'Non-Creamy Layer' Certification Plea, Citing Ineligibility Based on Hereditary Occupation Criteria
ED Shifts Sameer Wankhede's Money Laundering Case to Delhi, Informs Bombay HC
J& H HC Emphasizes Due Process, Slams Overuse of Preventive Detention under PSA
Madras High Court Quashes FIR Against Journalist Abhijit Majumder Over Periyar Remarks
Calcutta HC Takes Suo Motu Action on Alleged Sexual Assault and Land Transfer in Sandeshkhali
SC stays order of MP HC seeking justification for granting bail to an accused

SC stays order of MP HC seeking justification for granting bail to an accused

The Madhya Pradesh High Court's directive to a trial court judge to provide justification for granting bail to an accused was delayed by the Supreme Court on Friday. A bench made up of Chief Justice DY Chandrachud, Judge PS Narasimha, and Justice JB Pardiwala was presented with the case. The bench decided to stay the High Court's ruling while believing that such orders could compromise the district judiciary's independence in deciding on bail requests. 

When dictating the order, CJI DY Chandrachud observed that there didn't appear to be any justification for the High Court to ask the trial court for an explanation of its decision to grant bail. He stated:

"Such orders of the High Court seriously affect the independence of the district judiciary in considering bail applications."

As a result, the Supreme Court issued the following directives: 

1. The petitioner will be released on bail, subject to any restrictions the trial court may impose. 

2. The freedom to assist the Madhya Pradesh State's permanent counsel is granted. 

3. The High Court's instruction to the trial court judge to provide an explanation shall remain in effect.

Case Title: Totaram v. State of Madhya Pradesh 
Citation: SLP(Crl) No. 2269/2023

Click here to view Stay order dated 24.02.2023

Appearances of the Advocates:-

For Petitioner(s) 
Mr. Suyash Mohan Guru, Adv.
Mrs. Rekha Pandey, AOR
Mr. Nitin Agarwal, Adv.
Mrs. Shruti Singh Chouhan, Adv.
Mr. Raghav Pandey, Adv.
Mr. Sourabh Mulani, Adv.
Ms. Smriti Kumari, Adv.
Ms. Gauri Pandey, Adv. 

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy