Judgments - Anticipatory bail
N.M. Shrivastava Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Law Laid Down - Criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioners are not for violating the orders passed by the Supreme Court but as a factor to determine conspiracy in scheduling the second counselling for the extended period and permitting the candidates to be admitted on the last date. Thus, fixing of schedule by the petitioners cannot be an honest and bona fide exercise of administrative action but it is shaded with suspicion as it was not modified even when their attention Full Judgment
Dr. Vijay Kumar Pandya Vs. Union of India through CBI
Law Laid Down - Grant of anticipatory bail is to be considered in view of the grave accusation levelled against the accused and therefore, may be one of the petitioner is a senior citizen aged 70 years and suffering ailments, would not entitle him to concession of anticipatory bail. The modus operandi and gravity of accusation involving same crime number and almost similar allegations, as discussed in detail in the order passed in MCRC No.24600/2017 (Dr. Divya Kishore Satpathi vs. CBI) and connected Full Judgment
Dr. Divya Kishore Satpathi Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation
Law Laid Down - The action or inaction of the petitioners, who were running the medical colleges has denied admission to the large number of more meritorious candidates, who were, in fact, entitled to admission and thus, leading to their frustration. The entire process would be antithesis of the rule that the students should be admitted only on merit. The petitioners may not be an accused of taking life of a person but if the allegations are proved, they cannot commit more Full Judgment
FEKAN YADAV VERSUS SATENDRA YADAV @ BOSS YADAV @ SATENDRA KUMAR AND ORS.
R.MADHUSUDHAN VS. STATE OF KARNATAKA & ANR.
JASKARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.
RANI DUDEJA Vs. STATE OF HARYANA
Chaila Shukla Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
HARINDER SINGH GUJRAL V/s STATE (NCT OF DELHI)
SUDHIR Vs. THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.
Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, and after considering the gravity of the offence, circumstances of the case, particularly, the allegations of corruption and misappropriation of public funds released for rural development, and further considering the conduct of the appellants and the fact that the investigation is held up as the custodial interrogation of the appellants could not be done due to Full Judgment
BHADRESH BIPINBHAI SHETH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR
Dushyant Kumar Versus State of Himachal Pradesh
Surinder Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh and Shadi Ram Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Sudhakar Jha Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
Brahmchari Prasad Tiwari Vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
TEESTA ATUL SETALVAD AND ANR. Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT
the question that arises for consideration is whether liberty on the one hand and fair and effective investigation on the other, make out a case for extending the benefit under Section 438 CrPC. Needless to say "Liberty is to the collective body, what health is to every individual body. Without health, no pleasure can be tasted by man; without liberty, no happiness can be enjoyed by society. Having stated about the Full Judgment