LexGAJANAN DATTATRAY GORE versus THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA & ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 7 S.C.R. 1980 : 2025 INSC 913 Gajanan Dattatray Gore v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. (Criminal Appeal No. 3219 of 2025) 28 July 2025 [J.B. Pardiwala* and R. Mahadevan, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the bail granted to the appellant-accused on the basis of his undertaking to deposit Rs.25,00,000/- was rightly cancelled by the High Court on his failure to deposit the same. Headnotes† Directions by Supreme Court – Bail – Grant of, on the basis of any undertaking/statement given by accused – Practice deprecated – Directions issued: Held: High Courts as well as the Trial Courts shall decide the plea for regular bail or anticipatory bail strictly on the merits of the case and shall not exercise their discretion in this regard on any undertaking or any statement that the accused or his/her family members may be ready and willing to make – No order for grant of bail shall be made on the basis of the accused giving an undertaking to deposit a particular amount – The plea shall be decided strictly on merits in accordance with law – If the case is made out on merits the court may exercise its discretion and if no case is made out on merits the court shall reject the plea for regular bail or anticipatory bail as the case may be – However, in any circumstances the High Courts or trial courts shall not pass a conditional order of regular bail or anticipatory bail – Copy of this order to be sent to all the High Courts – Judicial deprecation. [Paras 20, 24, 26] Bail – Cancellation of, when justified – Appellant was granted bail by High Court on the basis of his undertaking to deposit Rs.25,00,000/- however, he failed to deposit the same – Challenged by complainant – Bail cancelled by High Court – Challenge to: Held: Appellant on his own free will and volition filed an affidavit in the form of an undertaking before the High Court that he would deposit Rs.25,00,000/- subject to which, he may be released on regular bail – Appellant got himself released on bail but failed to deposit the amount as undertaken by him before the High Court * Author [2025] 7 S.C.R. 1981 Gajanan Dattatray Gore v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr. on oath – Appellant has made a mockery of justice and abused the process of law – Appellant to surrender – Cost of Rs.50,000/- imposed. [Paras 8, 18, 23, 28] List of Acts Indian Penal Code, 1860; Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. List of Keywords Bail; Undertaking; Undertaking/statement by accused; Undertaking to deposit a particular amount; Undertaking flouted; Affidavit in the form of an undertaking; Bail granted on the basis of undertaking; Regular bail; Anticipatory bail; Resiled from undertaking; Cancellation of bail; Bail cancelled; Mockery of justice; Abuse of process of law; Bail plea to be decided strictly on merits of the case; Directions by Supreme Court Conditional order of regular bail or anticipatory bail; Judicial deprecation. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 3219 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 01.07.2025 of the High Court of Judicature at Bombay in IA No. 4524 of 2024 in Criminal Bail Application No. 445 of 2024 Appearances for Parties Advs. for the Appellant: A M Bojor Barua, Sr. Adv., Ravindra A. Lokhande, Vishal, Kalpna Chate, Rukhmini Barua, N Zealing, Rathod Rajesh Ranjit. Adv. for the Respondents: Prashant S. Kenjale. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Order J.B. Pardiwala, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal arises from the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay dated 1-7-2025 below interim application 1982 [2025] 7 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports No.4524/2024 filed in Criminal Bail Application No.445/2024, by which the interim application filed by the original complainant (Respondent No.2 – herein) came to be allowed and the order of bail passed by the High Court in favour of the appellant – herein dated 1-4-2024 came to be modified. 3. The facts giving rise to this appeal may be summarized as under:- 4. The appellant – herein came to be arrested in connection with Crime No.652 of 2023 dated 27-8-2023 registered with the Satara City Police Station, State of Maharashtra for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, 504, 506 read with 34 respectively of the Indian Penal Code (for short, “IPC”). 5. The appellant – herein was arrested on 17-8-2023. 6. As the Trial Court declined to release the appellant on regular bail, he w
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.