HomeAI · summaries
Storia in 4 fonti
Umar Khalid case explained: The Gulfisha Fatima ruling, Section 43D(5) and SC’s latest observations
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday said that "bail is the rule and jail is the exception" even in cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), while granting bail to a Jammu and Kashmir man accused in a narco-terror case, as per a report by PTI news agency.
Confronto fonti
4 prospettive sulla stessa storiaTimeline cronologica
- ·
hindustantimes.com
SC criticises its January verdict denying bail to Umar Khalid, Sharjeel Imam
The court held that “bail is the rule and jail is an exception” even in prosecutions under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act | India News
- ·
thehindu.com
Bail is the rule is not an empty slogan, even in UAPA and ‘terror’ cases: Supreme Court
Supreme Court reaffirms that bail is the rule, even in UAPA cases, emphasizing personal liberty rights and trial speed.
- ·
scroll.in
‘Bail is the rule even in UAPA cases’: SC says its verdict on Khalid, Imam pleas ignored precedent
The court’s observation came while hearing a man’s petition against an order that refused him bail in an Unlawful Activities Prevention Act case.
- ·
timesofindia.indiatimes.com
Umar Khalid case explained: The Gulfisha Fatima ruling, Section 43D(5) and SC’s latest observations
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court on Monday said that "bail is the rule and jail is the exception" even in cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), while granting…
- ·
Rush Hour: SC criticises its own verdict denying Khalid, Imam bail, rupee at record low and more
Become a Scroll member to get Rush Hour – a wrap of the day’s important stories delivered straight to your inbox every evening.
- ·
Supreme Court remarks on bail denial order may give ray of hope to Umar Khalid
The apex court also said that the Najeeb judgement “is binding law....” that cannot be “disregarded” even by “benches of lower strength of this court.” | India News
- ·
Bail, liberty, and a Supreme Court split in reading UAPA
The Supreme Court said the later judgments appeared to have “invented and then destroyed” a proposition that the Najeeb verdict itself never laid down | India News