PLD 2021 Supreme Court 799
Principle relating to post-arrest bail in offences not falling within prohibitory clause of section 497(1) Cr.P.C. Grant of bail in such offences is a rule and refusal an exception.
The main purpose of keeping an under-trial accused in detention is to secure his attendance at the trial so that the trial is conducted and concluded expeditiously or to protect and safeguard the society, if there is an apprehension of repetition of offence or commission of any other untoward act by the accused. Therefore, in order to make the case of an accused person fall under the exception to the rule of grant of bail in offences not covered by the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) CrPC, the prosecution has to essentially show from the material available on the record, such circumstances that may frustrate any of the said purposes, if the accused person is released on bail. The Supreme Court has time and again illustrated such circumstances or such conduct of the accused person that may bring his case under the exceptions to the rule of granting bail.5 They include the likelihood of:
(a) his abscondence to escape trial;
(b) his tampering with the prosecution evidence or influencing the prosecution witnesses to obstruct the course of justice; or
(c) his repeating the offence keeping in view his previous criminal record or the desperate manner in which he has prima facie acted in the commission of offence alleged.
A court which deals with an application for grant of bail in an offence not falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) CrPC must apply its judicious mind to the facts and circumstances of the case and to the conduct of the accused person, and decline to exercise the discretion of granting bail to him in such offence only when it finds any of the above noted circumstances or some other striking circumstance that impinges on the proceedings of the trial or poses a threat or danger to the society, justifying his case within the exception to the rule, as the circumstances mentioned above are not exhaustive and the facts and circumstances of each case are to be evaluated for application of the said principle.
0 Comments