2024 Supreme(SC) 1203

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Abhay S. Oka, Augustine George Masih, JJ.
Ayub Khan – Appellant
versus
The State of Rajasthan – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 5388 of 2024 (Arising out of Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No. 10587 of 2023)
Decided On : 17-12-2024

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Disposal of bail applications – Constitutional Courts can lay down principles governing grant of bail or anticipatory bail – However, Constitutional Courts cannot interfere with discretion of our Trial Courts by laying down form in which an order should be passed while deciding bail applications – Presence of antecedents of accused is only one of several considerations for deciding prayer for bail made by him.
(2) Explanation of a Judicial Officer can be called for only on administrative side.

Headnote:

(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 439 [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 483] – Bail applications – Disposal of – If Trial Courts commit errors while deciding bail applications, same can always be corrected on judicial side by Court, which are higher in judicial hierarchy – Constitutional Courts can lay down principles governing grant of bail or anticipatory bail – However, Constitutional Courts cannot interfere with discretion of our Trial Courts by laying down form in which an order should be passed while deciding bail applications – Presence of antecedents of accused is only one of several considerations for deciding prayer for bail made by him – In a given case, if accused makes out a strong prima facie case, depending upon fact situation and period of incarceration, presence of antecedents may not be a ground to deny bail – There may be a case where a Court can grant bail only on grounds of long incarceration – Presence of antecedents may not be relevant in such a case – In a given case, Court may grant default bail – Again, antecedents of accused are irrelevant in such a case – Depending upon peculiar facts, Court can grant bail notwithstanding existence of antecedents – In such cases, question of incorporating details of antecedents in a tabular form does not arise – If a High Court directs that in every bail order, a chart should be incorporated in a particular format, it will amount to interference with discretion conferred on Trial Courts – No Constitutional Court can direct Trial Courts to write orders on bail applications in a particular manner – What High Court has done while deciding a bail petition in a case where bail was denied by appellant as a Session Judge was completely uncalled for – Directions issued in Paragraphs 9 and 10 of decision of Rajasthan High Court in case of Jugal Kishore, (2020) 4 RLW 3386 cannot be said to be binding directions. (Paras 9, 10, 11, 12, 14 and 16)

(B) Judicial Discipline and Decorum – Adverse Remarks – Alleged disregard by Judicial Officer of directions issued by High Court – Explanation of a Judicial Officer can be called for only on administrative side – Even assuming that appellant was guilty of indiscipline, on judicial side, High Court ought not to have passed an order calling for an explanation from a judicial officer – Direction of calling for an explanation from a judicial officer by a judicial order was inappropriate – High Court ought to have shown restraint – High Court cannot damage career of a Judicial Officer by passing such orders – All adverse remarks/observations in impugned order made against appellant, expunged. (Paras 13, 18 and 19)

Facts of the case:

Appellant is a District and Sessions Judge of Rajasthan Judicial Service. Appellant joined judicial service in year 1993. Appellant has filed present appeal for limited purposes of striking down observations made in impugned order against him and for quashing the adverse directions issued against him. Appellant decided a bail application filed by an accused who was charged with offences punishable under Section 307 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3, 3/25 and 5/25 of the Arms Act, 1959. Appellant rejected bail application. Accused filed a bail application before the High Court. By impugned order, bail has been granted to accused. While granting bail, adverse observations have been made by High Court against appellant. Certain directions have been issued which affect appellant.

Findings of Court:

Observations made against appellant in orders dated 4th April 2023, 25th April 2023 and directions issued thereunder to appellant are set aside. Copy of this judgment shall be forwarded to Registrar General of High Court of Rajasthan who shall place the same before Chief Justice of said Court on administrative side.

Result : Appeal allowed.