CaseMinister
CaseMinister › Judgments › Supreme Court › 2018 › Sanjai Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Sanjai Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Supreme Court of India · 26 November 2018

Court
Supreme Court of India
Decided
26 November 2018
Case no.
Crl.A. No. 1448 of 2018
Bench
Kurian Joseph, Hemant Gupta
Author
Kurian Joseph
Length
2 pages
Have a question about this judgment?

Ask our Legal AI about it on WhatsApp: free, no signup, in English or Hindi.

Write it first.

NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1448 OF 2018
[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 3150 OF 2018]

SANJAI SINGH Appellant(s)

VERSUS

THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH Respondent(s)

JUDGMENT

KURIAN, J.

1.
Leave granted.

2. The appellant approached this Court, aggrieved by the rejection of his application for bail. He has been convicted and sentenced under Sections 304B read with Section 498A IPC and Section 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1986.

3. Taking note of the fact that the appellant had actually undergone around 14 years in jail, this Court, on 18.05.2018, released the appellant on interim bail for six months.

4. We are of the view that the Criminal Appeal No. 1379 of 2008 filed by the appellant is pending before the High Court.

5. Having heard the learned counsel appearing for the State, we are of the view that the appellant should be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal before the High Court. Ordered accordingly.

6. Accordingly, the appellant is directed to be released on bail during the pendency of the appeal before the High Court, subject to such conditions as may be imposed by the trial court.

7. In view of the above, the appeal is disposed of. .......................J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ] .......................J. [ HEMANT GUPTA ]

New Delhi;
November 26, 2018.

Ask CaseMinister about Sanjai Singh v. The State of Uttar Pradesh

Your 24×7 legal assistant on WhatsApp answers with the judgments that apply, in English or Hindi. No signup needed.

Questions about this judgment, or a case like it?Ask on WhatsApp