SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(SC) 1095

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KUMAR, JJ.
Virendra Yadav – Appellant
VERSUS
The State of Uttar Pradesh & ANR. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 3128 of 2023 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.4654 of 2023)
Decided On : 09-10-2023

IMPORTANT POINT
Bail - Grant of bail in heinous crime of murder bail on the basis of irrelevant considerations would amount to arbitrary exercise of judicial discretion.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Sections 437(5) and 439(2) - Bail - Cancellation of - Appellant stands indicted for commission of offences under Sections 147, 148, 352, 302 read with Section 34 of IPC - Grant of bail in heinous crime of murder bail on the basis of irrelevant considerations would amount to arbitrary exercise of judicial discretion - Post-mortem report in this case would reveal that deceased has sustained 12 ante-mortem injuries, all on head - High Court has erred in considering application for bail in the manner it was required to be considered in cases where charge is of commission of heinous crimes - Order granting bail to respondent No.2 invites interference - Order passed by High Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application set aside. (Paras 4 and 5)

Facts of the case:

Present appeal is directed judgment and order dated 03.02.2023 passed by High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Bail Application whereby second respondent herein was enlarged on bail.

Findings of Court:

Respondent No.2 shall surrender before Trial Court on or before 16.10.2023. In case of failure on part of respondent No.2 to surrender within stipulated time, appropriate steps shall be taken to arrest and commit him to custody, in accordance with law. On production before the trial Court, personal bond and the surety bonds shall be discharged.

Result : Appeal allowed.

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - (!) The Supreme Court held that granting bail in a heinous murder case based on irrelevant considerations amounts to arbitrary judicial discretion. - (!) The High Court’s order granting bail to the respondent No.2 was set aside; the appellant must surrender before the Trial Court by 16.10.2023, with bonds discharged on surrender. (!) (!) - (!) The appeal was allowed, and the order of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.53781 of 2022 was set aside. (!) - (!) The Court emphasized that post-mortem findings (12 ante-mortem injuries, all on the head) underscore the seriousness of the offense and the need to avoid arbitrary bail in such cases. (!) - (!) Registry is directed to communicate the order to the trial Court; pending applications are disposed of. (!) (!)

What is the guidance on bail in cases involving murder for the High Court and Supreme Court regarding irrelevant considerations?

What is required of a respondent granted bail in a heinous murder case when the appeal is allowed and bail is set aside?

What are the consequences and directions issued by the Supreme Court regarding surrender and custody if bail is set aside?


ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. This appeal is directed the judgment and order dated 03.02.2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.53781 of 2022 whereby the second respondent herein was enlarged on bail.

3. Heard learned counsel for the appellant, learned counsel for the standing counsel for the State of Uttar Pradesh and also the learned counsel for respondent No.2/accused No.5 in the chargesheet filed on completion of the investigation in F.I.R. No.47 of 2022 at Police Station Baluwa, District-Chandauli, Uttar Pradesh.

4. The appellant stands indicted for commission of offences under Sections 147, 148, 352, 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (I.P.C). He was arrested in connection with the crime on 29.03.2023. The impugned order was passed on 02.03.2023 on the application of respondent No.1/accused No.5 for regular bail. It is evident that respondent No.2 was granted bail assigning the reasons on the following lines:-

    “Having considered the submissions of the parties noted above, finding force in the submissions made by the learned counsel for the applicant; keeping in view uncertainty regarding conclusion of trial; one sided investigation by police, ignoring the case of accused side; applicant being under-trial having fundamental right to speedy; larger mandate of the Article 21 of the Constitution of India, considering the dictum of Apex Court in the case of Satendra Kumar Antil Vs. CBI & Another, passed in S.L.P.(Crl). No. 5191 of 2021, judgment dated 11.07.2022 and considering 5-6 times overcrowding in jails over and above their capacity by under trials.”

As noticed hereinbefore, the appellant standing trial along with other co-accused in a charge of commission of murder issued under Section 302, I.P.C. We have no doubt in our mind that the aforementioned reasons absolutely irrelevant considerations for granting bail in view of the facts that the crime was registered on 16.03.2022 and the appellant was arrested on 29.03.2022 when the charge is of commission of such a heinous crime. It is also to be noted that certain reasons, if allowed to be stand would cause trammel for a fair trial. We may hasten to add that the shall not be understood to have said that the appellant has committed the offences as alleged and certainly it is a matter of evidence. But then, there cannot be any doubt with respect to the position that ignoring the general principles of grant of bail in heinous crime of murder bail on the basis of irrelevant considerations would amount to arbitrary exercise of judicial discretion. It is to be noted that the post-mortem report in this case would reveal that the deceased has sustained 12 ante-mortem injuries, all on the head.

5. In the circumstances mentioned above, we are of the considered view that the High Court has erred in considering the application for bail in the manner it was required to be considered in cases where the charge is of commission of heinous crimes. The upshot of the discussion is that the order granting bail to the respondent No.2 invites interference. In the said circumstances, this appeal stands allowed. The order dated 02.03.2023 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.53781 of 2022 stands set aside. Respondent No.2 shall surrender before the Trial Court on or before 16.10.2023. In case of failure on the part of respondent No.2 to surrender within the above stipulated time, appropriate steps shall be taken to arrest and commit him to custody, in accordance with law. On production before the trial Court, the personal bond and the surety bonds shall be discharged.

6. The Criminal Appeal stands disposed of, as above. Registry shall communicate the order to the trial Court.

7. Pending application(s), shall stand disposed of.


Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top