1. Bail release refusal — Omission of Sections 3/4, Dowry Prohibition Act in bail order — Sections 304B and 498A, IPC. (Para 1 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 1501
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Sanjay Kishan Kaul, M.M. Sundresh, JJ.
Gopal Verma – Appellant
Versus
The State of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 819 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP(Crl.) No. 3540 of 2022)
Decided On : 19-05-2022
Important Points
Importance of following Court orders and addressing delays in trial proceedings.
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Proceedings
Act Referred
Headnote
Bail - Dowry Prohibition Act - Adding Provisions to Order
Fact of the Case:
The trial Court refused to release the appellant on bail despite the orders of the Court mentioning the charges under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC but not mentioning Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
Finding of the Court:
The Court added the provisions of Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act to the order and expressed dissatisfaction with the conduct of the judicial officer for not releasing the appellant despite the Court's orders.
Issues: Refusal of trial Court to release appellant on bail and addition of provisions to the order.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court emphasized the importance of following its orders and expressed concern over the delay in the trial proceedings.
Final Decision: The Court permitted the addition of provisions as prayed for and directed that both the orders be placed before the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. Trial court's refusal to release appellant on bail due to the absence of specific statutory provisions in the bail order. (Para 1 )
3. Trial court's refusal to release appellant on technical grounds is unjustified, particularly when trial progress is slow with minimal witness examination. (Para 2 )
4. Technical omissions in a bail order should not override the direction for release, particularly when trial progress is significantly delayed. (Para 2 )
5. Addition of statutory provisions to bail order permitted — Orders directed to be placed before the Chief Justice of the High Court. (Para 3 )
6. Can a trial court refuse bail release based on the omission of specific statutory provisions in a superior court's order?
No. The court indicated that such technicalities should not be used to prevent release, especially when the trial is progressing slowly. (Para 2 )
7. What factor should a trial court prioritize over technical omissions in a bail order?
The trial court should be concerned with the progress of the trial and the pace of witness examination rather than technical omissions in the bail order. (Para 2 )
8. What is the remedy when a trial court refuses to implement a superior court's bail order on technical grounds?
The superior court may amend the order to include the missing provisions and direct the matter to be reported to the Chief Justice of the High Court. (Para 3 )
ORDER
1. Learned counsel mentions the matter as despite the orders of this Court dated 17.05.2022, the trial Court is refusing to release the appellant on bail on the pretext that while the order mentions the charges under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC it does not mention Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. We have no hesitation in adding those provisions to the order but don't appreciate the conduct of the judicial officer whereby despite the orders of this Court, the appellant was not released. We may only add, from December 2021, only one witness has been examined by the trial Court and that should have been the matter of concern by the trial Court rather than what is sought to be raised.
3. We permit the addition as prayed for and direct that both the orders be placed before the Chief Justice of the Allahabad High Court.
