ISSUE:
Whether the High Court erred in granting bail to the accused despite prima facie material indicating their involvement in the conspiracy to murder Madhumita Shukla?
Whether the accused’s conduct, including interference with the investigation and attempts to influence witnesses, warranted cancellation of bail?
Whether the High Court failed to consider the correct legal parameters while granting bail, particularly the gravity of the offense, severity of punishment, and potential for obstruction of justice?
RULE:
Bail may be denied where prima facie material shows that the accused has attempted to interfere with the administration of justice by influencing witnesses, fabricating evidence, or misleading the investigation.
A co-accused’s confession, even if retracted, is not inadmissible per se and may be considered as corroborative evidence when supported by independent material.
The gravity of the offense, severity of potential punishment, and likelihood of tampering with evidence are crucial factors in deciding bail.
Post-bail conduct of the accused, including intimidation of witnesses or manipulation of evidence, can justify cancellation of bail regardless of prior judicial discretion.