Recent Supreme Court Judgments On Bail

Bimla Tiwari vs State of Bihar | Sections 437 to 439 CrPC | Anticipatory and Regular Bail | Money Recovery Proceedings | SLP(Crl) 834-835 OF 2023 | 16 Jan 2023 | 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 47 | Process of criminal law, particularly in matters of grant of bail, is not akin to money recovery proceedings but what has been noticed in the present case carries the peculiarities of its own. The process of criminal law cannot be utilised for arm-twisting and money recovery, particularly while opposing the prayer for bail. The question as to whether pre-arrest bail, or for that matter regular bail, in a given case is to be granted or not is required to be examined and the discretion is required to be exercised by the Court with reference to the material on record and the parameters governing bail considerations. In a given case, the concession of pre-arrest bail or regular bail could be declined even if the accused has made payment of the money involved or offers to make any payment; conversely, in a given case, the concession of pre-arrest bail or regular bail could be granted irrespective of any payment or any offer of payment.

State vs T. Gangi Reddy @ Yerra Gangi Reddy | Section 167(2) , 437(5) 439 (2) Cr.P.C. | Default Bail Cancellation | CrA 37 OF 2023 | 16 Jan 2023 | |2023 LiveLaw (SC) 37 | In a case where an accused is released on default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., and thereafter on filing of the chargesheet, a strong case is made out and on special reasons being made out from the chargesheet that the accused has committed a non-bailable crime and considering the grounds set out in Sections 437(5) and Section 439(2), his bail can be cancelled on merits and the Courts are not precluded from considering the application for cancelation of the bail on merits. However, mere filing of the chargesheet is not enough, but as observed and held hereinabove, on the basis of the chargesheet, a strong case is to be made out that the accused has committed non-bailable crime and he deserves to be in custody.

Guddan @ Roop Narayan vs State Of Rajasthan | Suspension of Sentence | Bail | Excessive Conditions | CrA 120 OF 2023 | 3 Jan 2023 | 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 45This Court, time and time again has held that jail is the exception and grant of bail is the rule, and in such a scenario, the conditions imposed on bail must not be unreasonable – The conditions of bail cannot be so onerous that their existence itself tantamounts to refusal of bail. In the present case, however, the excessive conditions herein have precisely become that, an antithesis to the grant of bail.. Any other accused in a similar circumstance at this point would not be in custody, however, the present Appellant, because of the conditions imposed, has not been able to leave the languish of jail. Can the Appellant, for not being able to comply with the excessive requirements, be detained in custody endlessly? To keep the Appellant in jail, that too in a case where he normally would have been granted bail for the alleged offences, is not just a symptom of injustice, but injustice itself.

Leave a Comment