Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD" Indian Courts Cannot Invalidate Foreign Arbitral Awards Passed Under Foreign Law: Madhya Pradesh High Court Enforces Texas-Based Award Despite Commercial Court’s Contrary Decree Calling Wife by Her Caste Name in Public Just Before Suicide is Immediate Cause of Self-Immolation: Madras High Court Upholds Husband’s Conviction Under Section 306 IPC No Work No Pay Is Not a Universal Rule: Punjab & Haryana High Court Dock Identification Without Prior TIP Is Absolutely Useless: P&H High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempt to Murder Case Filing Forged Court Pleadings in Union Government’s Name is Criminal Contempt: Karnataka High Court Sentences Litigant to Jail Execution of Will Proved, But Probate Justly Denied Due to Concealment of Property Sale: Delhi High Court Mere Designation Doesn’t Establish Criminal Liability: Bombay High Court Quashes Proceedings Against ICICI Officials in Octroi Evasion Case Fraud on Power Voids the Order: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Against Karnataka BJP Leader R. Ashoka, Slams Politically Motivated Prosecution Cause of Fire Is Immaterial If Fire Itself Is Insured Peril: Supreme Court Rebukes Insurer’s Repudiation Dragging a Trained Army Officer Up 20 Steps Without Resistance? The Story Lacks Credence: Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal in Army Officer’s Murder Semen Stains Alone Do Not Prove Rape: Supreme Court Acquits Doctor Accused of Rape No Mortgage, No SARFAESI: Supreme Court Rules Against NEDFi, Says Recovery Action in Nagaland Without Security Agreement Was Illegal Parity Cannot Be Denied by Geography: Supreme Court Holds Jharkhand Bound by Patna HC's Judgment, Orders Pay Revision for Industries Officer Once Power Flows Continuously from a Synchronized Turbine, It Is No Longer Infirm: Supreme Court Orders TANGEDCO to Pay Fixed Charges to Penna Electricity

Without explaining why bail granted suffer from non-application of mind -SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


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.   

Latest Legal News