Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE JAMMU AND KASHMIR
Jia Lal Kilam, J.
Sant Ram & Ors. - Appellant
Versus
State - Respondent
Cr. Miscellaneous Application No. 106/2008 (Svt.)
Decided On : 20th Poh Of 2008 (Svt.)
BAIL - CANCELLATION - S. 498 CR.P.C. - SUMMARY OF FACTS, FINDINGS, ISSUES, RATIO AND DECISION OF THE COURT IN A CASE INVOLVING CANCELLATION OF BAIL DUE TO ALLEGED MISUSE OF LIBERTY BY ACCUSED PERSONS.
Fact of the Case:
Accused persons were granted bail in a case involving death and grievous hurt. An application was filed by the prosecution alleging that the accused were misusing their liberty by intimidating and threatening prosecution witnesses. The Tehsildar Magistrate, after considering affidavits and a statement from the Court Sub-Inspector, cancelled the bail of the accused.
Finding of the Court:
The High Court found that the affidavits submitted by the prosecution witnesses were not corroborated by any other evidence and that the statement of the Court Sub-Inspector was hearsay. The Court also noted that the accused had been in custody for two months without the challan being produced before the Court.
Issues: 1. Whether the affidavits submitted by the prosecution witnesses were sufficient evidence to support the cancellation of bail. 2. Whether the accused had misused their liberty by intimidating and threatening prosecution witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The Court held that the affidavits submitted by the prosecution witnesses were not legal evidence as they were not covered by any of the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code that allow facts to be proved by affidavit. The Court also held that the statement of the Court Sub-Inspector was hearsay and could not be relied upon. The Court further held that the accused had not been given an opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses and that their bail should not have been cancelled without such an opportunity.
Final Decision: The Court ordered that the accused persons be released on bail of Rs. 1000/- with one surety each and that they execute personal bonds to the extent of the same amount.
2) The case, as already seen was registered on 6th Assuj 2008 and since then the challan has not been presented before the Court. I wonder why these cases should have been allowed to hang fire for such an abnormal length of time. I think in cases in which death has taken place,a speedy investigation is always called for and such cases should be produced before Courts without any unnecessary loss of time. If investigations are left pending thus before the police for such a long time, Be the possibility of the witnesses forgetting important facts or their being won over by the other side or the danger of some important evidence being lost cannot be excluded. If the police were more vigilant of their duties and had produced the challan in proper Court without any delay, perhaps no necessity of putting such an application as the present one would have arisen. But I do not think that the accused persons should have been allowed to continue in police custody for an unlimited period of time simply because the police does not produce the challan in time.
(3) After the Tehsildar Magistrate had cancelled their bail, the accused persons approached the Court of Sessions. The learned Sessions Judge relied upon the affidavits of Natha Singh and Gyan Singh and rejected their application submitted under Section 498 of the Criminal P. C. The learned Sessions Judge has also noted in his order that these affidavits are supported by the statement of the Court Sub-Inspector. I have gone through the statement of the Court Sub-Inspector and I find that he does not state any thing from his personal knowledge. All that he says is that the fact that the witnesses were being intimidated was brought to his notice. This evidence is hearsay and I wonder how it was treated by the earned Sessions Judge as corroborative.
(4) Then the only material before us is the two affidavits on behalf of the applicant and a number of affidavits on behalf o
AI
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
