Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, SANJAY KAROL, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
Krishna Sharma Alias Krishna Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of West Bengal & Anr. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 383 of 2024
Decided On : 24-01-2024
BAIL - CANCELLATION OF BAIL - The court emphasized that the cancellation of bail cannot be solely based on the absence of the appellant in court, as the criteria for granting and canceling bail are distinct. The court found no evidence of violation of bail conditions or misuse of liberty, leading to the decision to set aside the cancellation order.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant's bail was canceled due to their absence in court, attributed to a traffic jam caused by VIP movements, and the absence of their lawyer due to a withdrawn Vakalatnama.
Finding of the Court:
The court determined that the absence of the appellant did not justify the cancellation of bail, as there was no evidence of any violation of bail conditions or misuse of liberty.
Issues: Whether the cancellation of bail was justified based on the appellant's absence in court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that the grounds for granting bail differ from those for its cancellation, and absence alone does not constitute a valid reason for cancellation without evidence of misconduct.
Result: The court set aside the order canceling the bail and allowed the appeal.
Key Points: - The cancellation of bail cannot be solely based on the absence of the appellant in court; there must be evidence of violation of bail conditions or misuse of liberty. (!) - The parameters for grant of bail and cancellation of bail are totally different. (!) - The bail already granted may be cancelled if it is found that the person granted bail violated conditions or misused liberty by influencing witnesses or tampering with evidence; in this case, there was no such evidence. (!) - The order cancelling bail was set aside and the appeal allowed. (!) - The appellant’s absence due to traffic jam and absence of counsel due to Vakalatnama withdrawal did not justify cancellation of bail. (!)
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. The appellant challenges the order dated 06.09.2023, vide which the bail granted to the appellant earlier was cancelled.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the appellant submits that the appellant could not attend the Court on the said date as there was traffic jam due to VIP movements. He further submits that the lawyer of the appellant also could not remain present as his Vakalatnama was withdrawn on an earlier day.
4. Learned counsel for the respondent/State and the learned counsel for the complainant oppose the petition.
5. However, we find that merely because the appellant did not appear personally could not have been a ground for cancellation of bail. The parameters for grant of bail and cancellation of bail are totally different. The bail already granted may be cancelled, if it is found that the person who has been granted the benefit of bail has violated any of the conditions or misused the liberty by influencing the witnesses or tampering with the evidence.
6. Nothing of that sort is recorded in the impugned judgment. We therefore set aside the impugned order and allow this appeal. Pending application(s), if any, shall stand disposed of.
The cancellation of bail requires evidence of violation of conditions or misuse of liberty, not merely the absence of the accused in court.
The court established that failing to appear in court when granted bail violates bail conditions, leading to potential cancellation of bail.
Bail once granted should not be cancelled without cogent reasons, and the court must consider supervening circumstances carefully.
Bail cancellation requires clear evidence of breach or supervening circumstances; implied conditions cannot justify cancellation.
Bail once granted should not be cancelled without cogent reasons and must consider supervening circumstances.
The court emphasized that bail should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering supervening circumstances that render it no longer conducive to a fair trial, and it should only be c....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
