Delay in Test Identification & Absence of Motive Fatal to Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man for Murder Tokre Koli or Dhor Koli – Both Stand on Same Legal Footing: Bombay High Court Slams Scrutiny Committee for Disregarding Pre-Constitutional Records Consent Is No Defence When Victim Is Under 16: Delhi High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Granting Pre-Arrest Bail in Minor Rape Cases Would Send a Harmful Societal Signal: Delhi High Court Refuses Anticipatory Bail to Accused Citing POCSO’s Rigorous Standards Void Marriage No Shield Against Cruelty Charges: Karnataka High Court Affirms Section 498A Applies Even In Deceptive and Void Marital Relationships Consolidation Authorities Cannot Confer Ownership Or Alter Scheme Post Confirmation Without Due Process: Punjab & Haryana High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Jurisdiction Over Void Post-Scheme Orders Litigation Policy is Not Law, Can’t Enforce Guidelines Through Courts: Rajasthan High Court Refuses to Entertain Quo Warranto Against Additional Advocate General’s Appointment Police and Lawyers Are Two Limbs of Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Takes Suo Motu Cognizance in Police Misconduct Incident Sole Testimony, Forensic Gaps, and Withheld Witness: No Conviction Possible: Delhi High Court Affirms Acquittal in Murder Trial Remand Keeps the Dispute Alive – Not Arrears: Bombay High Court Holds SVLDRS Relief Must Be Computed Under Litigation Category Use of ‘Absconding’ in Employment Context Not Defamatory Per Se, But A Privileged Communication Under Exception 7 of Section 499 IPC: Allahabad High Court Daughter’s Right Extinguished When Partition Effected Prior to 2005 Amendment: Madras High Court Trial Courts Cannot Direct Filing of Challan After Conviction — Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Directions Against DSP Veer Singh Rule 4 Creates Parity, Not a Parallel Pension Pipeline: Rajasthan High Court Denies Dual Pension to Ex-Chief Justice Serving as SHRC Chairperson Right to Be Heard Must Be Preserved Where Claim Has a Legal Basis: Orissa High Court Upholds Impleadment of Will Beneficiary in Partition Suit Long-Term Ad Hocism Is Exploitation, Not Employment: Orissa High Court Orders Regularization Of Junior Typist After 25 Years Of Service PIL Cannot Be a Tool for Personal Grievances: Supreme Court Upholds Municipal Body’s Power to Revise Property Tax After 16 Years Omission of Accused’s Name by Eyewitness in FIR is a Fatal Lacuna: Supreme Court Acquits Man Convicted of Murder Correction In Revenue Map Under Section 30 Isn’t A Tool To Shift Plot Location After 17 Years: Supreme Court Quashes High Court’s Remand Casteist Abuses Must Be In Public View: Supreme Court Quashes SC/ST Act Proceedings Where Alleged Insults Occurred Inside Complainant’s House Resignation Bars Pension, But Not Gratuity: Supreme Court Draws Sharp Line Between Voluntary Retirement and Resignation in DTC Employee Case

Supreme Court: Bail in Murder Cases Requires Careful Consideration, Not Routine Grant

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


On 2 May 2023, The Supreme Court of India, in a recent judgement OMPRAKASH SAHNI Vs JAI SHANKAR CHAUDHARY & ANR. ETC., has emphasized that the grant of bail under Section 389 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) in cases involving serious offences like murder should only be done in exceptional cases. The Court further stated that the power to grant bail under this provision should not be used as a matter of routine and should be exercised carefully and judiciously after considering all relevant factors.

The judgement was delivered by a bench comprising Justices M.R. Shah and J.B. Pardiwala, and pertained to a case involving the suspension of sentence and grant of bail to two convicts who had been sentenced to life imprisonment for murder.

The Court relied on previous judgements to lay down the principles governing the grant of bail under Section 389 of the CrPC in cases involving serious offences like murder. It held that the court must objectively assess the matter and record reasons for suspending the execution of the sentence and granting bail. The court should consider factors like the nature of the accusation, the manner in which the crime was committed, the gravity of the offence, and the desirability of releasing the accused on bail after conviction for committing the serious offence of murder.

The Court further stated that while undertaking the exercise to ascertain whether the convict has fair chances of acquittal, the Appellate Court should not re-appreciate the evidence at the stage of Section 389 of the CrPC and try to pick up few lacunas or loopholes here or there in the case of the prosecution. Such an approach would not be correct.

The Court also observed that any observations touching the merits of the case were purely for the purpose of deciding the present appeals and shall not be construed as an expression of the final opinion in the pending criminal appeals before the High Court.

The impugned order passed by the High Court was set aside, and the convicts were ordered to surrender before the Trial Court within a period of three days from the date of the judgement.

OMPRAKASH SAHNI Vs JAI SHANKAR CHAUDHARY & ANR. ETC.

Latest Legal News