https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198592 The High Court cancelled the appellant's bail due to non-disclosure of simultaneous bail applications in different courts, citing lack of transparency. However, the Supreme Court emphasized that bail is not a form of punishment before conviction. Relying on the rationale of bail law, the Court found no interference with justice or valid grounds for bail refusal, directing the appellant to remain on bail unless the Sessions Court provides sufficient reasons for revocation. This case underscores the significance of transparency, the distinction between bail and punishment, and the requirement of valid reasons for bail denial, promoting justice and fairness in legal proceedings. en-us Mon, 20 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 Feb 2018 14:44:29 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198592 The High Court cancelled the appellant's bail due to non-disclosure of simultaneous bail applications in different courts, citing lack of transparency. However, the Supreme Court emphasized that bail is not a form of punishment before conviction. Relying on the rationale of bail law, the Court found no interference with justice or valid grounds for bail refusal, directing the appellant to remain on bail unless the Sessions Court provides sufficient reasons for revocation. This case underscores the significance of transparency, the distinction between bail and punishment, and the requirement of valid reasons for bail denial, promoting justice and fairness in legal proceedings. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 20 Feb 1978 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=198592