PLD 2021 SC 927
“Sufficient cause” for condonation of delay in cases of imprisoned accused or convicted persons is to be viewed through the lens of fundamental rights to liberty, dignity and fair trial, and determined with a lenient and liberal approach for providing such persons with equal access to court and proper opportunity to defend themselves.
It is by now well-established that bail is not to be withheld as a punishment. However, refusal of bail to an accused found prima facie involved in the commission of offences falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) CrPC is not a punitive measure but is more of a preventive step, taking care of the bi-focal interests of justice towards the right of the individual involved and the interest of the society affected. The law presumes that the severity of the punishment provided for offences falling within the prohibitory clause of Section 497(1) CrPC is such that it is likely to induce the accused person to avoid conviction by escaping trial or by tampering with the prosecution evidence including influencing the prosecution witnesses. The law allows bail, in such cases, if there are no reasonable grounds for believing that the accused has committed a non-bailable offence, but there are sufficient grounds for further inquiry into his guilt. Otherwise by declining bail, the courts ensure the presence of the accused person to face trial and protect the prosecution evidence from being tampered with or the prosecution witness from being influenced. The courts attempt to balance the interest of the society in bringing the offenders to justice and the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused person, by determining whether or not there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused person has committed the offence, in exercising their discretion to grant or decline the relief of bail.
0 Comments