CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints Minimum Wages Cannot Be Ignored While Determining Just Compensation: Andhra Pradesh High Court Re-Fixes Income of Deceased Mason, Enhances Interest to 7.5% 34 IPC | Common Intention Is Inferred From Manner Of Attack, Weapons Carried And Concerted Conduct: Allahabad High Court Last Date of Section 4 Publication Is Crucial—Error in Date Cannot Depress Market Value: Bombay High Court Enhances Compensation in Beed Land Acquisition Appeals Order 26 Rule 10-A CPC | Rarest of Rare: When a Mother Denies Her Own Child: Rajasthan High Court Orders DNA Test to Decide Maternity Acquittal Is Not a Passport Back to Uniform: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Dismissal of Constable in NDPS Case Despite Trial Court Verdict Limitation Under Section 468 Cr.P.C. Cannot Be Ignored — But Section 473 Keeps the Door Open in the Interest of Justice: P&H HC Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness

"Grant of Bail to a Co-Accused Should Not Be Dependent on Surrender of Another," Rules Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant order that impacts the dynamics of criminal justice and personal liberty, the Supreme Court of India clarified that "the question of grant of bail to a co-accused person cannot be made dependent upon the surrender of another accused."

The apex court, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Aniruddha Bose and Hon'ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi, modified the conditions for granting bail to Munshi Sah, the appellant in a case involving unnatural death. The case had charges framed under Sections 304-B/34 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

Previously, the High Court had granted bail to Munshi Sah on the condition that it would become effective only upon the surrender of the main accused, who is the husband of the deceased and is currently absconding. The Supreme Court held this condition to be improper and said, "We do not think the imposition and subsequent adhering to the condition of surrender of the husband of the deceased would be necessary for the grant of bail to the appellant."

Munshi Sah was represented by Mr. Garvesh Kabra, Mr. Ahmer Shaikh, and Mr. Avanish Deshpande. The State of Bihar was represented by Mr. Seshatalpa Sai Bandaru, Mr. Sanjeev Kumar Choudhary, Ms. Shradha Choudhary, Mr. Anshul Narayan, and Mr. Prem Prakash.

In its judgment, the Court emphasized the importance of treating each accused as a separate entity for the purpose of bail. This ruling sets a precedent that could influence how conditional bails are granted in the future.

The judgment further elaborates, "In such circumstances, we...modify the impugned orders and direct that the appellant may be released on bail in terms of the order(s) of the High Court but the condition which requires prior surrender of husband of the deceased...should not be insisted upon."

The ruling is expected to have a substantial impact on similar cases where bail is granted conditionally based on another accused's actions.

Date of Decision: 13 October 2023

MUNSHI SAH  vs THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR. 

Latest Legal News