RE:why rejected
by rahul nanda on Nov 27, 2007 04:59 PM Permalink
by rahul nanda on Nov 27, 2007 04:58 PM Dear Friend, Bail does not mean that the person is free. Bail is given once the Court granting it is satisfied that the person who got it will be appearing in the Court for the trial and all further proceedings without fail. The Court ensures this by way of sureties and Bond amount.The logic is that once the Court is convinced that the accused will be present for further proceedings, there is no reason that the person should be imprisoned. If at all he is found not guilty in the end who will repay for the days he spend in jail unjustified. To avoid that the accused is set at liberty with conditions. He will have to seek the permission of the Court for many matters such as travelling abroad etc. Don't be mistaken into thinking that once a person gets bail he has been aquitted. The charges are still there and the Court will find and decide on them. We will only appreciate all these allowances only when one of us is convicted wrongly and suffers unjust imprisonment. In the acquisitorial system of justice that we follow it is the prosecution which has to prove the case. Not the accused to disprove the case charged against him.( There are exceptions to this rule--for example in cases of rape.) Hope this answer is enough. I'll be available for further clarifications.
RE:why rejected
by Paul Samuel on Nov 27, 2007 05:08 PM Permalink
WHAT CLARIFICATION CAN U GIVE...SANJAY DUTT IS A PROCLAIMED OFFENDER AND HE HAS ADMITTED N COURT OF POSSESSING ILLEGAL ARMS... THAT MEANS HE IS A CRIMINAL.. WHY DOES HE NEED A BAIL... LET HIM BE IN JAIL AND ENJOY THE PRIVILEGES IN JAIL FOR SOME TIME...HE HAS TO PAY FOR HIS DEEDS...DO NOT SUPPORT CRIMINALS LIKE SANJAY DUTT..
