In a recent legal case, the Supreme Court meticulously analyzed the circumstances surrounding a bail application, highlighting the importance of due process and judicial scrutiny. The decision to grant bail was based on a detailed assessment of the closure reports and the appellant’s rights to liberty. This demonstrates the court’s commitment to upholding fairness and justice in legal proceedings.
Facts
- The appellant was arrested on 5 January, 2019 in connection with Crime No 210/2012 for offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code.
- A closure report was initially filed by the Police on 24 May, 2013 for the same crime, but further investigation was ordered by the Judicial Magistrate five years later, on 20 June, 2018.
- The appellant had previously been denied bail by the Additional Sessions Judge as well as the High Court in January 2019.
- He was released on bail after filing a second bail application in April 2019, and furnishing bail bonds and property documents.
- Subsequently, a complaint was lodged alleging forgery of documents related to the appellant’s bail release.
- The appellant was directed to be released on interim bail on 14 November, 2019.
Also Read: Legal Analysis on Arbitration Petition Limitation Period
Analysis
- Granting or rejecting bail should not be a mechanical decision as it concerns a person’s liberty.
- In this case, where closure reports were filed twice, the High Court should not have denied bail solely because the trial court did not accept the report.
- The appellant had no choice but to seek relief from the Supreme Court in this matter.
- The appellant deserves to be enlarged on bail.
- Bail is considered the rule, and jail is the exception.
Also Read: Analysis of High Courts’ Jurisdiction and Court Orders Under Article 142
Decision
- The interim bail order dated 14 November, 2019 is made absolute.
- The appellant shall stand released on regular bail subject to the bail bonds already furnished by him to the satisfaction of the trial court.
- The examination of witnesses would depend upon the fate of 2 closure reports.
- The appeal is allowed and the impugned order of the High Court dated 16 September, 2019 is set aside.
Also Read: Electoral Malpractices in Mayor Election
Case Title: JEETENDRA S/O LATE KIRTICHAND BORADE Vs. THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH (2020 INSC 308)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000408-000408 / 2020
