1. Appeal against rejection of bail in a Magistrate triable case involving prolonged custody and lack of trial progress. (Para 3 , 4 )
Back
Next 
2024 Supreme(SC) 1363
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ABHAY S. OKA, AUGUSTINE GEORGE MASIH, JJ.
Abdulmajid Abdulsattar Memon - Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 3525 of 2024 (Arising Out of SLP (Criminal) No(s).8686/2024)
Decided On : 27-08-2024
Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. Kishan Prajapati Advocate, Mr. Animesh Rajoriya Advocate, Mr. Somesh Chandra Jha AOR, Mr. Shreay Saini Advocate, Mr. Akash Kishore Advocate, Mr. Vishvajitsinh D. Chauhan Advocate
For the Respondent:Ms. Ruchi Kohli Senior, Advocate, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal AOR, Ms. Srishti Mishra Advocate, Ms. Devyani Bhatt Advocate
For the Appellant :Mr. Kishan Prajapati Advocate, Mr. Animesh Rajoriya Advocate, Mr. Somesh Chandra Jha AOR, Mr. Shreay Saini Advocate, Mr. Akash Kishore Advocate, Mr. Vishvajitsinh D. Chauhan Advocate
For the Respondent:Ms. Ruchi Kohli Senior, Advocate, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal AOR, Ms. Srishti Mishra Advocate, Ms. Devyani Bhatt Advocate
The court ruled that the High Court's refusal to grant bail was inappropriate due to the appellant's lengthy custody and lack of trial progress.
Headnote:(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 437 - Bail - The appellant has been in custody for over 1 year and 3 months without charge being framed, and the High Court's refusal to grant bail was deemed inappropriate given the circumstances of the case. (Paras 3, 4)
(B) Right to Bail - The court emphasized that the High Court should have granted bail considering the appellant's acquittals and quashings in previous cases. (Paras 4, 5)
Facts of the case:
The appellant has been in custody for more than 1 year and 3 months, with no progress in the trial and no charge framed against him. The appellant has a history of acquittals and quashings in 9 out of 14 cases.
Findings of Court:
The High Court should have granted bail, and the appellant is to be produced before the Trial Court to be released on bail until the trial's final disposal.
Issues: The main issue was whether the High Court's refusal to grant bail was justified given the appellant's lengthy custody and lack of trial progress.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the High Court's decision not to grant bail was inappropriate, emphasizing the right to bail in light of the appellant's circumstances and prior case outcomes.
Result: Appeal allowed.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. The court noted the absence of trial progress and failure to frame charges despite the appellant's prolonged custody in a Magistrate triable case. (Para 3 , 4 )
3. Prolonged custody without trial progress and failure to frame charges in a Magistrate triable case justifies the grant of bail. (Para 4 )
4. Appeal allowed; appellant directed to be released on bail by the Trial Court on appropriate terms. (Para 5 , 6 )
5. Does the failure to frame charges and lack of trial progress justify the grant of bail?
Yes, in Magistrate triable cases, prolonged custody without trial progress or the framing of charges is a ground for granting bail. (Para 3 , 4 )
6. How are criminal antecedents evaluated when determining bail?
The court evaluates the overall record of antecedents; if a substantial number of previous cases have resulted in acquittal or quashing, it may support the grant of bail. (Para 3 )
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.
2. Leave granted.
3. The appellant has been in custody for last more than 01 year and 03 months. On 22nd November, 2023, Special Leave Petition filed by the appellant against an order rejecting bail was not entertained by this Court by observing that at that stage, no case was made out to enlarge the appellant on bail. After 22nd November, 2023, there is no progress in the trial. Even, charge has not been framed. The antecedents of the appellant are pressed into service. Out of 14 cases, we find that in 09 cases, either the appellant has been acquitted or the offence has been quashed.
4. It is not in dispute that the case is a Magistrate triable case. In our view, the High Court ought to have granted bail to the appellant.
5. Accordingly, we direct that the appellant shall be produced before the Trial Court within a maximum period of one week from today. The Trial Court shall enlarge the appellant on bail on appropriate terms and conditions, till the final disposal of the trial.
6. The Appeal is, accordingly, allowed.
