-
by Admin
14 December 2025 5:24 PM
Supreme Court in latest reportable judgement (Sunil vs State of Bihar and Ors.) observed that the High Court has erred in not considering the material relevant to the determination of whether the accused was to be enlarged on bail.
Facts - Appellant informant younger brother of the deceased - on date of occurrence accused Ramawatar Bhagat respondent no.2 and other accused armed with lethal weapons came to the Bamboo Clumps of the informant and cutting the bamboos, brother of appellant forbade them. On that accused Ramawatar Bhagat ordered to kill - deceased tried to flee away but chased and surrounded - co-accused Manish Kumar fired upon him - deceased injured and fell down- informant went to save him - co-accused namely Rambabu Kumar fired twice upon the informant and got injured to some extent, during treatment brother of appellant died. All accused arrested. Respondent no.2 filed regular bail but same was dismissed by the session court. Respondent No.2 approached High court and his Bail was allowed – aggrieved appellant (informant) approached Supreme Court.
Supreme court held that while granting bail, the relevant considerations are, (i) nature of seriousness of the offence; (ii) character of the evidence and circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; and (iii) likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice; (iv) the impact that his release may make on the prosecution witnesses, its impact on the society; and (v) likelihood of his tampering.
Also held that there is a need to explain why bail was granted in such orders, especially if the accused is accused of committing a serious offence. Any order devoid of such reasons would suffer from non-application of mind.
Supreme Court further held that respondent No.2 is a history sheeter and involved in the double murder of father and brother of the informant, trial at the crucial stage of recording evidence and there are also allegations of pressurizing the informant and the witnesses - bail unsustainable.
D.D- JANUARY 25, 2022.
Sunil Kumar Versus The State of Bihar and Anr.
