The Supreme Court noted that such practice by the high court affects the independence of the district judiciary in considering bail applications.
—-
THE Supreme Court has deprecated the practice of seeking explanations from trial court judges for granting bail, as it directed the release of an accused on bail while staying the direction of the Madhya Pradesh High Court issuing a show cause notice to an Additional Sessions Judge for releasing the accused on bail.
A three-judge bench comprising Chief Justice of India (CJI) Dr. D.Y. Chandrachud and Justices P.S. Narasimha and J.B. Pardiwala observed that there was no justification for the high court to call for an explanation from the trial judge for having granted bail.
“Such orders of the high court seriously affect the independence of the district judiciary in considering applications for bail in appropriate cases,” the bench underscored.
The bench was considering an appeal filed by one Totaram challenging the high court’s order cancelling the bail granted to him by the sessions court. He is facing a charge sheet with respect to alleged offences punishable under Sections 294 (obscene acts and songs), 323 (punishment for voluntarily causing hurt), 342 (punishment for wrongful confinement), 354 (assault of criminal force to woman with intent to outrage her modesty) and 506 (punishment for criminal intimidation) read with Section 34 (acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention) of the Indian Penal Code.
On December 2 last year, a single judge bench of the high court comprising Justice Sanjay Dwivedi had directed the arrest of the accused Totaram while considering an application seeking to cancel his bail. The first round of bail application filed by Totaram was rejected by the trial court. Thereafter, an application for granting bail was moved before the high court, which was dismissed as withdrawn on July 21, 2022. However, the accused filed a bail application again before the trial court, which on August 16, 2022 released him on bail.
Disapproving the trial court’s order, Justice Dwivedi held, “The trial court has granted bail to the respondent no.2 without taking into account the order passed by the High Court and merely because charge-sheet has been filed cannot be considered as a changed circumstance, as such the order passed by the court below on 16/08/2022 in bail application no.297/2022 is hereby rejected. Since the bail granted to respondent no.2 by the aforesaid order is rejected, therefore, police authorities are directed to arrest respondent no.2 in the respective offence immediately”.
Now, the Supreme Court has observed that it was a fit and proper case for the grant of bail even at this stage.
Click here to read the order.
