IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
GITA GOPI, J.
Chauhan Mahendrasinh Udesinh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat & Anr. – Respondent
R/CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION (AGAINST ORDER PASSED BY SUBORDINATE COURT) NO. 1277 of 2024
Decided on : 21-08-2024
Bail - Criminal Revision Application - Cr.P.C. Sections 439(2) - The court emphasized that bail cancellation requires cogent reasons and cannot be based on implied conditions not explicitly stated in the bail order.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant challenged the cancellation of bail by the Sessions Judge, arguing that the bail conditions did not include a monetary deposit, and that the cancellation was unjustified as there were no allegations of witness tampering or threats.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the cancellation of bail was not justified as the conditions for cancellation were not met, and the reliance on an implied condition was inappropriate.
Issues: Whether the cancellation of bail was justified based on the applicant's alleged breach of an implied condition not stated in the bail order.
Ratio Decidendi: Bail once granted should not be cancelled without cogent reasons, and the court must consider whether supervening circumstances exist that would justify such a cancellation.
Result: The court quashed the order cancelling the bail and allowed the application.
JUDGMENT :
1. RULE returnable forthwith. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the respondent – State.
2. The present Criminal Revision Application challenges the legality and validity of the order dated 14.08.2024 passed by the learned 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mehsana, Visnagar passed in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.356 of 2024, which was preferred by the complainant under Section 439(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to in short as ‘Cr.P.C.’).
3. Heard learned Advocate for the applicant Mr. Maulik M. Soni, who submitted that the bail granted on 08.12.2022 by the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mehsana, Visnagar came to be cancelled and the applicant was directed to surrender before the trial Court and the arrest warrant has been issued. It is further submitted the process of arrest warrant is still open as it has not been served on the applicant and in the meantime, the applicant has preferred the present Criminal Revision Application challenging the order of cancellation of bail.
4. It is further submitted that the bail which was granted was in connection with the First Information Report (FIR) registered with Satlasana Police Station as Part A C.R. No.11206062230328 of 2023 for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 419, 420, 465, 467, 471 and 474 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The FIR was registered on 02.08.2023. It is submitted that the conditions of bail did not include any condition of deposit of money. The applicant had volunteered by filing Pursis – Exhibit 7 in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.786 of 2023 that he would be willing to deposit an amount of Rs.5,00,000/- at Jai Somnath Credit Society. It is also submitted that the said pursis was only recorded and no direction was given to the applicant to deposit any amount. Inspite of that, the learned 2nd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Mehsana, Visnagar passed an order in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.356 of 2024 considering it as a breach of the Undertaking and cancelled the bail granted by the Court.
5. It is further submitted that the cancellation of bail should not be mechanically ordered when there is no such allegations of holding any threats to witness or making any attempt to tamper with evidence. It is further submitted that the learned Judge while granting the bail has observed about the Undertaking given by the applicant. The order of bail did not include the condition of deposit of any amount as per the Undertaking filed by the applicant. Hence, it is submitted that the same cannot be considered as breach of conditions.
6. On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the Undertaking filed by the applicant has been observed in the order, which itself can be considered as implied condition for the revisionist to have followed the same and thus, the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge cancelling the bail granted to the applicant is just and consistent with the facts of the matter.
7. The object of bail has been laid down in case of Sanjay Chandra Vs. CBI, reported in (2012) 1 SCC 40, wherein in para-14, the Hon’ble Apex Court held as under :-
Gurcharan Singh & Ors. Vs. State (Delhi Administration)
Raghubir Singh v. State of Bihar reported in 1986 4 SCC 481
Merubhai Ramabhai Khodiyatar (Hun) Rabari v. State of Gujarat reported in 2021 (2) G.L.R. 1175
Bail cancellation requires clear evidence of breach or supervening circumstances; implied conditions cannot justify cancellation.
(1) Cancellation of bail – Bail once granted should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering whether any supervening circumstances have rendered it no longer conducive to a fair tr....
Bail should not be cancelled without substantial justification, and courts must consider the circumstances surrounding compliance with bail conditions.
Bail once granted should not be cancelled without cogent reasons, and the court must consider supervening circumstances carefully.
Bail may be cancelled if the accused violates conditions by engaging in further criminal activity, with the court needing to assess the seriousness and context of such violations.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the misuse of bail and the legal principles governing the cancellation of bail.
Cancellation of bail justified for violating conditions by threatening complainant post-release, as evidenced by recorded statement and fresh FIR; distinct from bail grant, warranted on cogent ground....
Bail may be canceled when an accused violates conditions, especially if such violations threaten the integrity of a fair trial, as established by precedents.
Cancellations of bail require very strong and cogent reasons, especially when considering incidents that occurred after bail was granted; mere allegations are insufficient without substantial proof.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.