Kamal @ Kamal Choudhary vs State Of Madhya Pradesh

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2025 Supreme(SC) 1637

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Abhay S. Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.
Kamal @ Kamal Choudhary – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 992 of 2025 (Arising Out of SLP (Criminal) No. 808 of 2025)
Decided on : 28-02-2025

Headnote:(A) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 307, 326, 324, 323, 294, 147, 148, 149 - The Arms Act - Sections 25 and 27 - Criminal appeal for bail - Appellant detained for 4 years and 8 months - Earlier applications for bail rejected - High Court dismissed new bail application erroneously based on lack of liberty to file fresh application - Court noted that changes in circumstances, including examination of all eyewitnesses, warranted reconsideration of bail. (Paras 3, 5, 6)

Facts of the case:
The appellant, connected to serious offences, had multiple bail applications denied by the Sessions Court and High Court, the latter citing procedural reasons for rejection, despite significant changes in case circumstances.

Findings of Court:
The court determined the High Court's reasoning was flawed, emphasizing the right to reapply for bail when circumstances change and ruled in favor of the appellant's release on bail until trial.

Issues: The primary issue involved improper dismissal of the appellant's bail application based on invalid grounds and the consideration of new evidence as a significant change in circumstances.

Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that a fresh bail application can be filed based on material changes in circumstances, affirming that the High Court must evaluate such applications on their merits despite prior rejections.

Result: Appeal allowed; the appellant shall be granted bail pending trial.

Table of Content
1. appellant's incarceration details and bail history. (Para 3 , 4)
2. high court's dismissal of the bail application. (Para 5)
3. court's reasoning for granting bail. (Para 6)
4. final order and direction for bail grant. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)

ORDER :

1. Leave granted.

2. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

3. The appellant is in custody for a period of 04 years and 08 months in connection with the offences punishable under Sections 302 , 307, 326, 324, 323, 294, 147, 148 and 149 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 and Sections 25 and 27 of the ARMS ACT .

4. The first application for bail filed by the appellant was dismissed by the Sessions Court on 7th February, 2023. The High Court also dismissed the bail application filed by the appellant. On 19th May, 2023, a special leave petition filed by the appellant was dismissed as withdrawn. Instead of filing a fresh application before the Sessions Court, a second special leave petition was filed against the same order of the High Court which was dismissed by an order dated 14th August, 2024.

5. By the impugned order, the High Court has dismissed the application for bail filed by the appellant on an erroneous ground. The High Court has observed that as no liberty was granted by the High Court and this Court to file a fresh bail application, the appellant was not entitled to file a fresh bail application.

6. We fail to understand the reasoning adopted by the High Court. Even if an earlier bail application is rejected, an accused can make a fresh application at a subsequent stage on the ground of material change in circumstances. Therefore, it was the duty of the High Court to consider the bail application on merits. However, that has not been done. After the first bail application was rejected, now all the eyewitnesses have been examined. This was a major change in circumstance brought about after the dismissal of the first application for bail by the Sessions Court. Considering this fact and considering the long duration of incarceration, the appellant is entitled to be enlarged on bail pending the trial.

7. For that purpose, 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 till the conclusion of the trial on appropriate terms and conditions, including the condition of regularly and punctually attending the Trial Court and cooperating with the Trial Court for early disposal of the case.

8. The Appeal is, accordingly, allowed.

9. Application seeking intervention stands disposed of accordingly.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document