Sumeet Saluja vs State Of U.P. Tr.Cbi
- SCC(2015) 17 SCC 210
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
Where an accused person in a criminal case involving commercial crimes is similarly circumstanced to co-accused who have been granted bail, the accused must be granted bail unless material circumstances distinguish him from those co-accused, and the court shall impose conditions including personal bond, reporting to the police station, and deposit of passport as necessary to ensure presence at trial.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
2. This appeal is directed against the judgment and order
dated 13th January, 2011, passed by the Allahabad High Court,
rejecting the petitioner's prayer for grant of bail in
Crl.Misc.Bail Application No.34595 of 2010.
3. There are three accused in this case. Charge-sheet has
been filed against all of them on 8th December, 2010, under
Sections 120B, 417, 420, 468, 471 IPC and 132 and 135 of the
Customs Act, P.S.C.B.I.Ghaziabad. While apart from the
appellant, one of the other two accused, Mr. Surinder Singh has
been granted bail after his arrest, the third accused, Gyan Chand
filed a writ petition, being No.37 of 2011, in this Court, in
which directions have been given that he should not be arrested
in connection with the case in question.
-2-
4. The present appellant is in custody since 11th October,
2010, and it appears that he is similarly placed as the other two
accused. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed.
5. Let the appellant be released on bail to the satisfaction
of the trial court, upon such conditions, as may be considered
necessary to ensure his presence at the time of trial. Such
conditions may also include, reporting to the SHO of the local
police station once every month until further orders and deposit
of his passport to the court.
6. Since this matter involves a question of some importance
as far as commercial crimes are concerned, let the trial be
completed as quickly as possible, without unnecessary
adjournments and delay.
..................J. (ALTAMAS KABIR)
...................J. (CYRIAC JOSEPH)
NEW DELHI, April 18, 2011.
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free