IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
Sobhin Sunny, S/o. Sunny – Petitioner
Versus
State Of Kerala, Represented By Public Prosecutor, High Court Of Kerala – Respondent
Crl. M.C. No. 4830 Of 2022
Decided On : 24-05-2024
Criminal Procedure - Bail Conditions - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, Juvenile Justice Act - Section 27(b) of NDPS Act, Section 77 of Juvenile Justice Act - [KEYWORD] - [SUBJECT] - [Cr.P.C. Section 482] - The court discussed the legal framework governing the cancellation of bail, citing various decisions and legal provisions. It emphasized that violation of bail conditions, misuse of liberty, and involvement in criminal activities during the bail period are grounds for cancellation of bail, as per Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. The court also highlighted the distinction between bail orders at different stages of the legal process and the consequences of violating bail conditions.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, accused in a case under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act and the Juvenile Justice Act, had bail granted with conditions. Subsequently, the petitioner was alleged to have committed another offense, leading to the prosecution seeking the cancellation of bail based on the violation of bail conditions.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner had indeed violated the bail conditions by committing another offense during the bail period, warranting the cancellation of bail. The court also addressed the legal arguments regarding the cancellation of bail at different stages of the legal process.
Issues: The issues involved the violation of bail conditions, the legality of canceling bail at different stages of the legal process, and the interpretation of relevant legal provisions and precedents.
Ratio Decidendi: The court established that the violation of bail conditions, misuse of liberty, and involvement in criminal activities during the bail period are grounds for cancellation of bail, as per Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. It emphasized the distinction between bail orders at different stages of the legal process and the consequences of violating bail conditions.
Final Decision: The petition was dismissed, and the petitioner was directed to surrender before the police or face arrest and production before the Special Court.
ORDER :
This Criminal Miscellaneous Case has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (‘Cr.P.C’ for short) by the 1st accused in Crime No.725/2018 of Alakkode Police Station, to quash Annexure-A4 order.
2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor in detail. Perused Annexure-A4 order and the decision placed by the learned counsel for the petitioner.
3. The precis of the case is as follows:-The petitioner, who is the accused in Crime No.725/2018 of Alakkode Police Station, was granted bail as per Annexure-A4 order in Crl.M.C.No.1805/2018 dated 05.01.2019 by the Special Court, where the accused is alleged to have committed offence punishable under Section 27(b) of the under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (`NDPS Act’ for short) and Section 77 of the Juvenile Justice Act.
4. While granting bail, the Special Court imposed certain conditions and condition No.(iv) is that “the petitioner shall not involve in any other crime during the bail period”. Since the petitioner subsequently involved in Crime No.100/2022 of Alakkode Police Station alleging commission of offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act, prosecution filed a petition to cancel the bail contending that the fourth condition in the bail order dated 05.01.2019 in Crl.M.C.No.1805/2018 was violated.
5. The learned Special Judge addressed the contention raised by the prosecution and the objection raised by the petitioner in this regard. Finally the learned Special Judge found that the petitioner, who had been continuing on bail granted in Crl.M.C.No.1805/2018, again committed offence punishable under Section 20(b)(ii)(A) of the NDPS Act as per Crime No.100/2022 of Alakkode Police Station and thereby the petitioner had violated the fourth condition imposed by the Special Court in the bail order. Accordingly, for the said reason bail granted in Crime No.725/2018 has been cancelled.
6. While impeaching the veracity of the order, the point argued by the learned counsel for the petitioner is that bail granted by the court during crime stage cannot be cancelled after filing final report for violating conditions in the bail order. It is argued that the High Court also cannot cancel the order of bail granted by it, at crime stage, after final report has been filed, and after Sessions Court granted regular bail to the accused, on the ground that the petitioner violated the conditions in the order passed by the High Court. According to the learned counsel for the petitioner, this legal position is discussed in the decision reported in [2012 (1) KLT 203], State of Kerala v. Moidheen Kunji. Therefore, it is zealously argued that, Annexure-A4 order passed by the learned Special Judge is illegal and the same deserves interference.
7. Supporting Annexure-A4 order, the learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the decision in Moideen Kunji’s case (supra) is on a different footing and the same was rendered when considering cancellation of bail granted by the High Court when the accused was granted bail by the Sessions Court after filing of the final report.
8. In so far as the legal question as to whether what are the contingencies under which bail can be cancelled the law is well settled. In the decision reported in [2022 (7) KHC 109 : 2022 KHC OnLine 883 : 2022(6) KLT OnLine 1129], Sreeja Mannangath v. State of Kerala, this Court considered the parameters governing cancellation of bail referring the decisions of the Apex Court and observed in paragraphs 8 to 15 as under:
a) If he misuses his libert
State of Kerala v. Moidheen Kunji
Sreeja Mannangath v. State of Kerala
Dolat Ram and Others v. State of Haryana
Violation of bail conditions, misuse of liberty, and involvement in criminal activities during the bail period are grounds for cancellation of bail, as per Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C.
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.
Violation of bail conditions, especially through further criminal activity, justifies cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) of the Cr.P.C.
Violating Condition Imposed in Bail Order - Cancel Bail - Criminal activity violating condition/conditions imposed in the bail order, the same is a supervening circumstances to cancel the bail.
Point of law : Hon'ble Apex Court has adverted to all the past precedents and has encapsulated the circumstances under which bail granted to the accused under S.439 (1) of the Cr. P. C. can be revoke....
Cancellation of bail requires cogent evidence of supervening circumstances; mere subsequent charges do not automatically justify cancellation if they do not affect the original trial.
The court ruled that mere registration of a subsequent offence does not justify automatic bail cancellation; a thorough inquiry into supervening circumstances is necessary.
Bail should not be cancelled without clear evidence of violation of conditions or misuse of liberty, as established by the court's analysis.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the misuse of bail and the legal principles governing the cancellation of bail.
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.