Lack Of Boundaries In Sale Deed Not Fatal To Title If Plot Number & Parent Title Are Sufficiently Identifiable: Calcutta High Court Terror Perception Of Underworld Justifies Delay In Invoking MCOCA; Purely Civil Disputes Can Metamorphose Into Criminal Offence: Bombay High Court Identical Wills Executed By Spouses On Same Day Not Necessarily 'Mutual Wills' Restricting Power Of Alienation: Delhi High Court Written Notice Not Mandatory For Revoking Permission Under Section 41 Presidency Small Cause Courts Act: Gujarat High Court Wife Cannot Maintain Complaint Against Husband Under Senior Citizens Act; Not Intended For Spousal Disputes: Karnataka High Court Mere Presence At Scene Or Facilitation Without Intent To Aid Crime Does Not Amount To Abetment: Delhi High Court Offences Under IT Act Punishable With 3 Years Imprisonment Are Bailable Under Section 77B: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail In KCA Data Theft Case Premature Release Can't Be Denied Citing Section 435 CrPC If Sentence Under Central Act Is Already Served: Madras High Court Suppression Of Higher Qualification To Secure Job Reserved For Lower Education Is Foundational Fraud, Sympathy Has No Role: Supreme Court MBBS Admissions | Candidate Using NIOS Marks To Meet 50% Eligibility Cannot Claim State Govt School Quota: Orissa High Court High Court Cannot Exercise Article 227 Power To Strike Off Plaint When Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Exists: Madras High Court Section 69 IEA | Onus On Propounder To Lead Secondary Evidence & Remove Suspicious Circumstances If Attesting Witnesses Are Dead: Telangana High Court

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