Back
RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT BENCH AT JAIPUR
Mahendar Kumar Goyal, J.
Union of India - Appellant
Versus
Yogendra Singh Rajput & Ors. - Respondents
Criminal Bail Cancellation Application No. 125 of 2020
Decided On : 18-08-2021
[BAIL] - [CANCELLATION OF BAIL] - [The court analyzed the legal provisions under Sections 437 and 439 of the CrPC, determining that the subsequent grant of bail by the Sessions Court was justified despite the prior dismissal by the trial court. The court emphasized that the change in the court's jurisdiction and the reasoning provided in the bail orders were sufficient to uphold the decision, leading to the dismissal of the bail cancellation applications.]
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought cancellation of bail granted to the accused-respondents, arguing that their second bail applications were improperly entertained shortly after a prior dismissal without any substantial change in circumstances.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused-respondents were granted bail by the Sessions Court under Section 439 CrPC after their initial application was dismissed under Section 437 CrPC, indicating a valid change in jurisdiction and reasoning.
Issues: Whether the Sessions Court's grant of bail under Section 439 CrPC was justified despite the prior dismissal of the bail application by the trial court under Section 437 CrPC.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the change in the court's jurisdiction and the well-reasoned orders for bail justified the decision to grant bail, irrespective of the timing of the applications.
Result: The applications seeking cancellation of bail were dismissed.
ORDER
1. These applications under Section 439(2) seeking cancellation of bail granted to the accused-respondents under Section 439 CrPC by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge No.06, Jaipur Metropolitan-II, vide order dated 07.12.2020 & 11.12.2020 respectively, have been filed by the applicant.
2. Sole contention raised by the learned counsel for the applicant is that the first bail application of the accused-petitioners was dismissed by the learned Court vide its order dated 01.12.2020; but, they were extended benefit of bail while entertaining their second bail applications just six days and ten days respectively thereafter vide order dated 07.12.2020 & 11.12.2020 respectively. He submitted that in the interregnum there was no change in circumstance except lapse of few days. He, therefore, prayed for cancellation of bail extended to accused-petitioners vide order dated 07.12.2020 & 11.12.2020 respectively.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the accused-respondent submitted that the contention is wholly misconceived inasmuch as vide order dated 01.12.2020, the bail application of the accused-respondents was dismissed by the learned trial Court under Section 437 CrPC; whereas, they have been extended benefit of bail by the learned Sessions Court under Section 439 CrPC and hence, it is not a case of entertaining second bail applications by the same Court within a period of few days without there being substantial change in circumstance. They, therefore, prayed for dismissal of the application seeking cancellation of bail.
4. Heard the learned counsels for the parties and perused the record.
5. In view of the fact that after dismissal of their bail application by the learned trial Court under Section 437 CrPC, they have been extended benefit of bail by the learned Sessions Court under Section 439 CrPC, the contention raised by learned counsel for the petitioner looses its force. Further, a perusal of the orders dated 07.12.2020 & 11.12.2020 reveal that the same are well-reasoned based on relevant criteria.
6. Therefore, the bail cancellation applications are dismissed.
The court established that a subsequent grant of bail by a higher court (Sessions Court) can be valid even after a prior dismissal by a lower court, provided the decision is well-reasoned and based o....
Judicial discretion in bail matters must be exercised judiciously, requiring changed circumstances for successive applications.
Judicial discretion in granting bail must be exercised judiciously, with specific reasons provided, especially when prior applications have been denied.
A bail cancellation application cannot be pursued in the High Court after the Sessions Court has rejected it; such challenges must follow appropriate procedural avenues and respect distinctions in la....
Cancellation of Bail – Justified -Applicant had clearly violated the condition imposed while granting of bail by getting involved in another crime of similar nature. Under the circumstances, the bail....
(1) Cancellation of bail – Under normal circumstances, application for cancellation of bail filed on merits as opposed to violation of conditions of bail order should be placed before same Single Jud....
The court ruled that mere registration of a subsequent offence does not justify automatic bail cancellation; a thorough inquiry into supervening circumstances is necessary.
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.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
