Category: Law Of Bail

ISSUE:

Whether successive bail applications by the same accused in the same case should be placed before the same judge who decided the previous application?

Whether the application for bail of a co-accused should be placed before the same judge who decided the bail application of another accused in the same crime?

Whether the registry must ensure that successive bail applications are assigned appropriately to prevent forum shopping?

RULE:

Successive bail applications by the same accused in the same case must be placed before the same judge who decided the previous bail application, if available, to maintain judicial discipline, prevent forum shopping, and ensure consistency in judicial decisions.

A co-accused’s bail application need not be placed before the same judge who decided the bail application of another accused in the same case, as the subject matter of each accused's bail plea may differ.

The registry must ensure that successive bail applications are assigned correctly, and both the defense and prosecution must disclose previous bail applications and orders to maintain judicial propriety and prevent abuse of the legal process.

ISSUE:

Whether courts can release an accused without any surety under CrPC?

Whether the bail should take into account the socio-economic status of the accused?

Whether a surety can be rejected on the ground that the surety is in a different district or state?

RULE:

Bail includes release without sureties and must be guided by principles of social justice.

Courts must prioritise access to justice in granting bail to prevent arbitrariness and ensure personal liberty.

ISSUE:

Whether the Magistrate wrongly granted bail to the accused charged for an offence punishable with death or life imprisonment?

RULE:

Section 437 of the Code of Criminal Procedure stipulates that only the High Court and Sessions Court can grant bail to a person accused of a non-bailable offence. Any other Court can grant bail only if there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the accused has committed the offence.

While granting bail, a Court has to keep in mind the nature of accusations, the nature of evidence in support thereof, the character, behaviour, means and standing of the accused, and similar other considerations.

ISSUE:

Whether the High Court, while granting bail, failed to adequately consider the criminal antecedents of the accused and the gravity of the offense, thus making the order perverse and unsustainable?

Whether the High Court erred in prioritizing the period of custody over societal concerns and the nature of the alleged crime in granting bail?

Whether the grant of bail was justified despite the accused being a history-sheeter with numerous pending cases, including serious offenses?

RULE:

The discretion to grant bail must consider the gravity of the offense, criminal antecedents, societal interest, and evidence on record. A perverse or unreasoned order is liable to be set aside.

Individual liberty is subordinate to societal concerns in cases of heinous crimes or when public safety is at risk.

ISSUE:

Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code is subject to rigid limitations or dependent on the discretion of the courts based on case-specific facts?

Whether the imposition of blanket restrictions on anticipatory bail violates the individual's fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution?

Whether considerations under Section 437 apply to anticipatory bail applications under Section 438?

RULE:

Judicial Discretion in Anticipatory Bail: Courts have wide discretion to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438, guided by the facts and circumstances of each case, without being restricted by rigid, predetermined rules or conditions.

Balancing Liberty and Investigation: The provision must be interpreted to protect individual liberty while ensuring it does not unduly hinder legitimate police investigations, with conditions imposed as necessary to maintain this balance.

ISSUE:

Whether the practice of denying bail to those sentenced to life imprisonment should be departed from when appeals are significantly delayed?

Whether prolonged incarceration during pending appeals infringes upon the principles of justice and fairness?

Whether a prima facie case for appeal and extended jail time without a timely hearing warrant bail?

RULE:

Judicial practices must not prevail if they result in injustice; prolonged delays in hearing appeals warrant a reconsideration of bail, especially in cases with prima facie merit.

In cases where special leave to appeal is granted, and the accused has already served substantial jail time, bail should be granted unless cogent reasons suggest otherwise.

ISSUE:

Whether the High Court was justified in rejecting anticipatory bail to the appellant?

RULE:

Arrest of an accused should be the last option and restricted to exceptional cases where arresting the accused is imperative in the facts and circumstances of that case. Irrational and indiscriminate arrests are gross violations of human rights.

Article 21 of the Indian Constitution provides to every person right to life and personal liberty.

ISSUE:

Whether or not a bail can be granted to the accused at the pre-trial stage or post-conviction stage by statutory appeal?

RULE:

The vital considerations are :-(a) The nature of charge, the nature of the evidence and, the punishment to which the party may be liable, if convicted, or conviction is confirmed. When the crime charged is of the highest magnitude and the punishment of it assigned by law is of extreme severity, the court may reasonably presume, some evidence warranting that no amount of bail would secure the presence of the convict at the stage of judgment, should he be enlarged; (b) whether the cause of justice would be thwarted by him who seeks the benignant jurisdiction of the court to be freed for the time being (c) Antecedents of the man and socio-geographical circumstances; and whether the petitoner's record shows him to be a habitual offender; (d) when a person, charged with a grave offence has been acquitted at a stage, the intermediate acquittal has pertinence to a bail plea when the appeal before this court pends. The ground for denial of provisional release, becomes weaker when a fair finding of innocence has been recorded by one court; (e) Whether the accused's safety may be more in prison than in the vengeful village where feuds have provoked the violent offence and (f) the period in prison already spent and the prospect of delay in the appeal being heard and disposed of. 

ISSUE:

Whether the question of cancellation of bail is different from admission to bail under Section 439(1)?

RULE:

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as Special powers of High Court or Court of Session regarding bail.
A High Court or Court of Session may direct that any person who has been released on bail under this Chapter be arrested and commit him to custody.
Section 439 empowers the Session Court or High Court to grant bail if accused is in custody.