TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court denies bail for money laundering and corruption suspects in Rajasthan mining case. Bail must be assessed case by case.</h1> <h3>DR. ASHOK SINGHVI S/O A.M. SINGHVI Versus UNION OF INDIA</h3> DR. ASHOK SINGHVI S/O A.M. SINGHVI Versus UNION OF INDIA - TMI Issues: Bail applications under Section 439 Cr.P.C. in a case involving money laundering and corruption in the mining department of the State Government of Rajasthan.Detailed Analysis:1. Prima Facie Case and Legal Position on Bail in Economic Offences:- The accused applicants sought bail based on parity with co-accused persons already granted bail. However, the ASG argued that bail in economic offences must be considered differently due to their impact on the economy and society. The ASG emphasized that bail cannot be granted solely on the ground of parity and highlighted the importance of considering the prima facie case, role of each accused, and relevant factors.2. Role of Accused Applicants and Evidence Against Them:- The accused applicants were alleged to be the kingpins of the conspiracy, with one holding a high-ranking government position misused for bribery. Significant amounts of tainted money were involved, and evidence such as call recordings and bank details linked them to the crime. The ASG argued that their conduct, including evading trial and delayed surrender, set them apart from other co-accused persons.3. Judicial Discipline and Consideration of Individual Cases:- The judgment emphasized the need for judicial discipline in following precedents but noted that each accused's role and circumstances must be individually assessed when granting bail. The court highlighted that bail cannot be claimed solely on the basis of co-accused persons being granted bail, especially when the accused have different roles and levels of involvement in the alleged crime.4. Decision and Dismissal of Bail Applications:- After considering the arguments from both sides and analyzing the legal positions, the court dismissed the bail applications of the accused applicants. The court concluded that the applicants' major roles in the crime, strong evidence against them, conduct of evading trial, and the severe nature of the economic offence warranted denial of bail. The judgment emphasized that the applicants did not deserve bail based on the specific circumstances of the case, despite bail being granted to some co-accused persons.This detailed analysis reflects the court's thorough consideration of the legal principles surrounding bail in economic offences, the individual roles of the accused applicants, and the need to assess each case independently when determining bail eligibility.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
