Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – s.483 – Enlargement on regular bail – Sustainability – FIR registered against the accused and others under the provisions of IPC and the Arms Act, for abducting certain individuals, violently attacking them with dangerous weapons, and causing grievous injuries, resulting in the death of the complainant’s son – Accused was absconding, non-bailable warrants issued against him, and was later arrested – High Court granted regular bail to the accused whereas, the other accused persons remained in custody – Challenge to:
Held: High Court erroneously passed an order releasing the accused on bail – While considerations such as the period of custody and testimonies of key prosecution witnesses having been recorded are relevant, the Court erred by inter alia, not considering the grievous nature of the crime, the possibility of influencing the trial by the accused and the conduct of the accused during investigation – After registration of the FIR against the accused, he remained absconded and evaded arrest, as such non-bailable warrants had to be issued against him and his associates, securing their custody, however his whereabouts remained unknown and consequently the police declared a cash reward for giving information about the accused – High Court ought to have taken this relevant fact into its deliberation, while adjudicating the entitlement of the accused for regular bail – This Court must also be cognizant of the seriousness of the allegations against the accused – Accused persons allegedly abducted certain individuals; violently attacked them with dangerous weapons; and caused grievous injuries, resulting in the unfortunate death of the complainant’s son – Also, loaded firearm recovered from the vehicle of these persons, other weapons stained in blood also recovered from the spot of the crime – Recording of the alleged incident-accused attacking the injured persons with deadly weapons, found in the phones of one of the co-accused persons – While the veracity of the said evidence is a matter of trial, but these allegations are shocking and serious in nature – This Court cannot lose sight of the influence an accused wields in society while considering the grant of bail – Accused is a celebrated wrestler and Olympian, who has represented the nation at the international level, and carries societal impact – In such circumstances, it cannot be said that he would have no domineering influence over witnesses or delay the proceedings of trial – Allegations of pressurizing witnesses made, before the order granting bail was passed – Thus, the impugned order cannot be sustained and is set aside – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.308, 325, 323, 341, 506, 188, 269, 34 – Arms Act, 1959 – ss.25, 54, 59. [Paras 20-27]
Bail – Setting aside an order granting bail vis-à-vis cancellation of bail – Distinction between – Explained. [Paras 15-19]
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.