Bail Application Scrutiny: Judicial Discretion Requires Cogent Reasons in Heinous Offences – Karnataka High Court

Share:
law relationship 24 v Mortgagor judge notice court bail material 7 child fathers taxfirecracker post investigation documents Passed rti jurisdiction dispute property landlord second dispute public school fir mother psychiatrist divorce evidence nursing

In a landmark decision today, the High Court of Karnataka, led by The Hon’ble Mr. Justice S.Vishwajith Shetty, set a new precedent in the judicial approach to bail applications, especially in cases involving serious offenses. The court overturned a bail order, emphasizing the necessity for detailed reasoning and strict adherence to legal principles in such matters.

The case, arising from a criminal petition filed under Section 439(2) of the Cr.PC, sought to cancel the bail granted to the accused in a murder case. The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Shetty, in his judgment, highlighted the need for rigorous examination in successive bail applications, particularly when previous applications were rejected without any significant change in circumstances.

Justice Shetty’s observation, “It is trite that the courts are required to record reasons while granting bail in cases where heinous offences are involved,” underscored the judicial responsibility in granting bail. This statement reflects the court’s commitment to ensuring justice and due diligence in the judicial process.

The judgment also stressed the importance of adhering to the principles laid down by the Supreme Court regarding successive bail applications. The Hon’ble Justice pointed out the violation of these principles in the current case, where the accused had previously had multiple bail applications rejected.

Date of Decision: 27 November 2023

MR MURALI V VS STATE OF KARNATAKA and Others

    

Download Judgment

Share: