Google Play App Store

Legal NewsNews Legal BlogsLaw Blogs Branding BlogsJudgements Branding BlogsBranding Blogs All Legal News and BlogsAll Blogs Legal JobsLegal Jobs

Supreme Court on Diluting Bail Condition Supreme Court on Diluting Bail Condition

Bronze medal Reporter Adv.vrinda Posted 1 Nov 2019
Supreme Court on Diluting Bail Condition

The Supreme Court determined that mere inconvenience within the matter of approaching the court seeking permission to travel abroad be a reason to dilute such condition Obligatory in associate degree Anticipatory bail order. The bench comprising Justice Arun Mishra and Justice Ravindra Bhat determined so in associate degree attractiveness filed by a victim's father against the order of the geographical region and Haryana court that diluted conditions within the antecedent bail order by permitting an application filed by the suspect.

There could be no gainsaying that the right to travel abroad is a valuable one and an integral part of the right to personal liberty. Equally, however, the pre-condition of securing prior permission before traveling abroad is a crucial ingredient that undoubtedly was engrafted as a condition for the grant of anticipatory bail in this case. Mere inconvenience in the matter of approaching the court, therefore- absent of any significant change of circumstances (i.e. framing of charges or no significant or serious material emerging during the trial, in the course of deposition of key witnesses, as to the role of the respondent), ought not to have led to dilution of the terms of the High Court's previous consistent orders. At best, the condition for seeking permission before traveling abroad could have been regulated, not deleted altogether. The High Court by its impugned order, noticed the provisions of   Sections 437 and 438 of the CrPC.It also took note of decisions  which  stressed upon the value of personal liberty and observed that the court has to exercise extreme care in imposing restrictions in regard to  travel. The  court was influenced by two decisions of the  Delhi High Court and the Gujarat High court respectively (k.Ramani v.State 2014 (10)RCR(Criminal) 1468 and Kenal Vrajmohan  Shah  v. Department  of  Revenue  Intelligence,   2016   (341)   ELT   37).The court noted in these two judgments that the requirement of obtaining  permission prior to travel have been dispensed with  . Taking due notice of the fact that the respondent was a frequent visitor and he had in the past partipated in certain  conferences ,seminarsetc.,itproceed modify the terms of  of anticipatory bail conditions imposed earlier.Read the judgment below…. more legal judgment in India.

Read the Judgement


Note:- We try our level best to avoid any kind of abusive content posted by users. Kindly report to us if you notice any, [email protected]

Copyright @ Pathmpor Consultants Pvt Ltd

F

r

e

e


A

d

v

i

c

e