Supreme Court's Cool-minded Verdict in Civil-Criminal Clash

A Supreme Court bench led by Justice J B Pardiwala granted anticipatory bail in a criminal case stemming from a civil dispute, highlighting judicial calm and adherence to law, following controversy over remarks against an Allahabad High Court judge. The court emphasized the non-criminal nature of trust breaches in sales transactions.

In a noteworthy display of judicial composure, a Supreme Court bench, spearheaded by Justice J B Pardiwala, granted anticipatory bail to a couple entangled in criminal charges emerging from a civil disagreement. This move comes after a prior controversy with an Allahabad High Court judge and emphasizes the significance of maintaining legal consistency.

Justice Pardiwala had previously criticized a High Court decision for permitting criminal proceedings in civil disputes, only to retract his remarks under the advisement of Chief Justice B R Gavai. The Supreme Court condemned the Rajasthan High Court's denial of bail, citing the misunderstanding of well-established legal principles as the root cause of such judicial discrepancies.

The case revolved around allegations of cheating and breach of trust linked to a sale transaction. Despite the Rajasthan High Court's concerns regarding monetary recovery, the Supreme Court asserted that sales transactions could not be grounds for criminal breaches of trust, hence reversing the earlier denial of anticipatory bail.

(With inputs from agencies.)