Bail --- Statutory ground of delay in conclusion of trial --- Scope --- If any accused deliberately causes delay in the conclusion of trial by moving irrelevant repetitive applications , then he is not entitled for bail on the statutory ground of delay in conclusion of trial .
2024 SCMR 1479
Bail --- Offences not falling within the prohibitory clause of section 497 , Cr.P.C .--- For such offences grant of bail is a rule and refusal is an exception .
2024 SCMR 1596
Bail --- Registration of other criminal cases --- Mere registration of other criminal cases against an accused does not disentitle him for the grant of bail if on merits he has a prima facie case .
2024 SCMR 1596
Bail --- Rule of consistency --- Doctrine of parity --- Scope --- Rule of consistency , or in other words , the doctrine of parity in criminal cases , including bail matters , recapitulates that where the role ascribed to the accused is one and the same as that of the co - accused , then the benefit extended to the co- accused should be extended to the accused also , on the principle that like cases should be treated alike , but after accurate evaluation and assessment of the co - offenders ' role in the commission of the alleged offence - While applying the doctrine of parity in bail matters , the Court is obligated to concentrate on the constituents of the role assigned to the accused and then decide whether a case for the grant of bail on the standard of parity or rule of consistency is made out or not .
2024 SCMR 1528
Bail , grant of - Principle - It is better to err in granting bail than to err in refusal because ultimate conviction and sentence can repair the wrong resulting from a mistaken relief of bail .
2024 SCMR 1567
2024 SCMR 1525
Bail , refusal of --- In the present case one person had lost his life and one person had sustained injuries at the hands of accused persons --- Furthermore , the petitioner ( accused ) along with another accused was nominated in the FIR and specific role of firing at the deceased and injured person was attributed to petitioner specifically --- Prosecution witnesses in their statements had supported the version of the complainant given by him in the FIR - Medical evidence also corroborated the ocular account --- Record further reflected that the version of complainant was corroborated by the recovery of empties from the place of incident and recovery of pistol at the pointation of the petitioner , therefore , there appeared reasonable grounds to believe that petitioner / accused had committed the offence which was punishable with death or imprisonment for life , hence the case of petitioner fell within the prohibitory clause of section 497 , Cr.P.C .--- Tentative assessment of material available on record prima facie connected the petitioner with the commission of the offence which fell within the ambit of the prohibitory clause of section 497 , Cr.P.C .--- Petition was dismissed , leave was declined , and petitioner was refused bail .
2024 SCMR 1576
S . 497 ( 1 ) , first proviso --- Bail --- Female accused with children --- Often many women implicated in cognizable offenses are found poverty - stricken and illiterate and in some cases , they have to take care of children , including suckling children --- There are also many examples where the children are to live in prisons with the mothers --- This ground reality is also ought to be considered which would not only involve the interest of such accused women , but also the children who are not supposed to be exposed to prisons , where there shall always be a severe risk and peril of inheriting not only poverty but also criminality , during the incarceration of their mother --- The first proviso to section 497 ( 1 ) , Cr.P.C. facilitates the Court to conditionally release on bail an accused if he is under the age of 16 years or is a woman or is sick or infirm under the doctrine of welfare legislation , reinforced by way of the said proviso which requires a purposive interpretation for extending the benefit of bail to the taxonomy of persons mentioned in it , and the same is to be taken into consideration constructively and auspiciously depending upon the set of circumstances in each case , among other factors , including the satisfaction of the Court that the bail petitioner does not have any criminal record or is not a habitual offender .
2024 SCMR 1528
Bail , grant of --- Female accused with suckling children --- Further inquiry , case of --- Rule of consistency , applicability of --- FIR was lodged against some unknown persons , without even disclosing their identity or features -- From time to time the complainant recorded her to implicate different accused supplementary statements persons --- Present petitioner ( female accused ) was implicated vide a supplementary statement --- Three further supplementary statements were also recorded by the complainant , and in the last supplementary statement , she implicated an accused who was attributed the role of making fire on the right leg below the abdomen of the deceased , but he was granted bail by the Supreme Court --- Even in view of such supplementary statements , nothing was produced at present stage to show that the petitioner was mastermind of the murder --- Record showed that except the petitioner , all other co - accused persons had been granted bail either by the Trial Court or the Supreme Court-- All the accused persons who were part of the criminal conspiracy , including the main accused who fired upon the deceased , had been granted bail , therefore at present stage , there appeared no reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioner was guilty for the offence jotted down in the FIR --- Petitioner had not only made out a case of further inquiry but she was also entitled to be enlarged on bail in view of the rule of consistency coupled with the benefit of the first proviso to Section 497 ( 1 ) , Cr.P.C .--- Petition was converted into an appeal and allowed , and the petitioner was enlarged on bail .
2024 SCMR 1528
Bail , grant of --- Statutory ground of delay in conclusion of trial --- Present case did not involve any crime punishable by death -- Petitioner ( accused ) was arrested on 05.08.2022 and was behind the bars since then --- Charge in the case was framed on 12.06.2023 and yet the trial had not been concluded --- Grant of bail on the statutory ground of delay in the conclusion of trial was a right of accused unless such delay had been occasioned as a result of his own conduct --- Only ground on the basis of which the petitioner's application for bail was dismissed was that petitioner moved an application under Section 265 - K , Cr.P.C - However , the same did not reflect any design , pattern , or concerted effort by the petitioner to delay the conclusion of trial -- An application for the protection of the accused's rights and for fair trial guaranteed under Article 10 - A of the Constitution did not amount to any design , pattern , or concerted effort by the accused to delay the trial -- Thus , merely moving an application under Section 265 - K , Cr.P.C does not amount to deliberate delay on the part of the accused in conclusion of trial --- In the present case only one application was moved and after that no adjournment was sought by the counsel for the accused on the relevant date of hearing - In such view a case of statutory ground of delay in the conclusion of trial was prima facie made out within the remit of Section 497 , Cr.P.C .--- Petition was converted into an appeal and allowed , and the petitioner was granted post - arrest bail .
2024 SCMR 1479
0 Comments