Back
2019 Supreme(SC) 1965
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
A.M. Khanwilkar, Ajay Rastogi, JJ.
Priya Sharma - Appellant
Versus
State Of Uttarakhand - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 329 of 2019
Decided On : 21-02-2019
Kamini Jaiswal, Adv., Akhilesh Kalra, Adv., Rohit Kumar Singh, Adv., Avinash Chandra, Adv., Raghavendra Pratap Singh, Adv., Jatinderpal Singh, Adv., Rani Mishra, Adv., Tanmaya Agarwal, Adv., Jatinder Kumar Bhatia, Adv.
The court may consider factors such as gender, duration of custody, and framing of charges when deciding on bail applications for serious offenses.
Headnote:
Bail - Criminal Law - The court granted bail to the accused-appellant charged under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C. and Section 8/9 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, considering the fact that the accused-appellant is a woman, has been in custody for a significant period, and that charges have already been framed. The High Court's order rejecting the bail application was set aside.
Fact of the Case:
The accused-appellant was charged under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C. and Section 8/9 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The High Court rejected the bail application, leading to the appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found it appropriate to release the accused-appellant on bail, considering her gender, the duration of custody, and the framing of charges. The High Court's order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Issues: The main issue was the grant of bail to the accused-appellant charged with serious offenses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the gender of the accused, the duration of custody, and the framing of charges as grounds for granting bail.
Final Decision: The court set aside the High Court's order and allowed the appeal, granting bail to the accused-appellant.
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
3. This appeal is against the judgment and order dated 21.12.2018 passed by the High Court of Uttarakhand at Nainital, whereby the bail application filed by the accused- appellant came to be rejected.
4. The accused-appellant has been charged for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C. and Section 8/9 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
5. Considering the fact that the accused-appellant is a woman and that she is in custody from March, 2018 coupled with the fact that in June, 2018 charge-sheet has already been filed and on 16th February, 2019 charges have also been framed by the trial Court, we deem it appropriate to release the accused-appellant on bail in connection with First Information Report bearing No.0047/2018 dated 26.01.2018, Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar on such terms and conditions as may be imposed by the trial Court. We order accordingly.
6. The order of the High Court is set aside and the appeal is allowed accordingly.
7. We make it clear that grant of bail is no expression of opinion either way on the merits of the case and the trial court shall proceed with the trial in accordance with law.
