Writ Jurisdiction Not Appropriate For Adjudicating Complex Title Disputes; Mutation Entries Do Not Confer Ownership: Madhya Pradesh High Court Joint Account Holder Not Liable Under Section 138 NI Act If Not A Signatory To Dishonoured Cheque: Allahabad High Court Private Individuals Accepting Money Can Be Prosecuted Under MPID Act; Nomenclature As 'Loan' Irrelevant: Supreme Court Nomenclature Of Transaction As 'Loan' Irrelevant; If Ingredients Met, It Is A 'Deposit' Under MPID Act: Supreme Court Pleadings Must State Material Facts, Not Evidence; Deficiency In Pleading Cannot Be Raised For First Time In Appeal: Supreme Court Denial Of Remission Cannot Rest Solely On Heinousness Of Crime; Justice Doesn't Permit Permanent Incarceration In Shadow Of Worst Act: Supreme Court Second Application For Rejection Of Plaint Barred By Res Judicata If Earlier Order Attained Finality: Supreme Court Section 6(5) Hindu Succession Act Is A Saving Clause, Not A Jurisdictional Bar To Partition Suits: Supreme Court Sale Of Natural Gas Via Common Carrier Pipelines Is An Inter-State Sale; UP Has No Jurisdiction To Levy VAT: Supreme Court Mediclaim Reimbursement Not Deductible From Motor Accident Compensation; Tortfeasor Can’t Benefit From Claimant’s Prudence: Supreme Court Rules Of Procedure Are Handmaid Of Justice, Not Mistress; Striking Off Defence Under Order XV Rule 5 CPC Is Not Mechanical: Supreme Court Power To Strike Off Tenant's Defense Under Order XV Rule 5 CPC Is Discretionary, Not To Be Exercised Mechanically: Supreme Court Areas Urbanised Before 1959 Don't Require Separate Notification To Fall Under Delhi Rent Control Act: Delhi High Court Police Cannot Freeze Bank Accounts To Perform Compensatory Justice; Direct Nexus With Offence Essential: Bombay High Court FSL Probe Before Electronic Evidence Meets Section 65B Admissibility Standards: Gujarat High Court Court Shouldn't Adjudicate Rights At Stage Of Granting Leave Under Section 92 CPC, Only Prima Facie Case Required: Allahabad High Court Right To Seek Bail Based On Non-Furnishing Of 'Grounds Of Arrest' Applies Only Prospectively From November 6, 2025: Madras High Court Prior Exposure To Accused Before TIP Renders Identification Meaningless: Delhi High Court Acquits Four In Uphaar Cinema Murder Case No Particular Format Prescribed For 'Proposed Resolution' In No-Confidence Motion; Intention Of Members To Be Gathered From Document As A Whole: Orissa High Court Trial Court Cannot Grant Temporary Injunction Without Adverting To Allegations Of Fraud And Collusion: Calcutta High Court "Ganja" Definition Under NDPS Act Excludes Roots & Stems: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail As Seized Weight Included Whole Plants Right To Speedy Trial Under Article 21 Doesn't Displace Section 37 NDPS Mandate In Commercial Quantity Cases: Orissa High Court

Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception: Punjab and Haryana High Court Upholds Fundamental Principle

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant legal development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court reaffirmed the fundamental principle of "Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception." This crucial principle was upheld in a recent judgement delivered by HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI on December 15, 2023.

The case in question involved a petition for regular bail filed by the petitioner, SUNNY, who faced charges under Sections 379-B, 411, 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, with Section 394 IPC added later. These charges were related to the alleged snatching of a mobile phone.

The court's observation on this fundamental principle of bail was clear and resolute: "Bail is the Rule and Jail is an Exception." This principle has been a cornerstone of criminal jurisprudence in India, emphasizing that detention should not be mandatory, especially when other means can secure the presence of the accused for trial.

In its detailed judgement, the court also considered the petitioner's detention for about one year and the fact that neither the complainant nor another victim identified the petitioner as one of the accused. The trial was at an initial stage, and the court took into account the right to a speedy trial and the presumption of innocence of the accused.

The final order of the court granted the concession of regular bail to the petitioner, ordering their release on bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate or trial court.

However, the court made it clear that if the petitioner were found involved in similar offenses in the future, the State had the right to seek the cancellation of the regular bail.

Date of Decision: December 15, 2023

SUNNY VS STATE OF PUNJAB

 

Latest Legal News