Bail Condition Requiring Accused To Appear In Police Station May Lead To Human Rights Abuses, Give Scope Of False Allegations: Gujarat High Court
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that conditions requiring an accused to mark his presence at police station could lead to grievances, human rights abuses, and false allegations. “It is needless to point out that such conditions of marking presence at Police Station would invite many grievances which may also lead to abuse of human rights and may give a scope of false allegations which...
The Gujarat High Court has ruled that conditions requiring an accused to mark his presence at police station could lead to grievances, human rights abuses, and false allegations.
“It is needless to point out that such conditions of marking presence at Police Station would invite many grievances which may also lead to abuse of human rights and may give a scope of false allegations which would lead to multiplicity of proceedings and unverified aspects. Many a times, the CCTV Footage would not be available to the Court to verify the aspect about the authenticity of the claims and counter claims,” Justice Gita Gopi observed.
The observation came while hearing a revision application challenging order of a Magistrate Court which had canceled applicant's bail. This was after the Investigating Officer reported breach of bail condition, requiring applicant to mark his presence at the Police station on a specified day.
Applicant claimed that he was late to mark his presence as he had to attend someone's last rituals. He claimed that he did visit the police station on the same day, a little late, but the IO conveyed that the reporting time had elapsed and his presence was not officially recorded.
Having reviewed the submissions and the case records, the Court observed that bail had been granted to the applicant after considering various factors, including the seriousness of the offense, emerging evidence, the unique circumstances of the case, the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice, tampering with evidence, and the reliability of prosecution witnesses.
The Court noted, , "After having considered all the above facts, the bail granted should not be cancelled mechanically unless and until some supervening circumstances are brought to the notice of the Court."
The Court emphasized that the accused has the right to request leniency from the Investigating Officer regarding the timing of their required appearances.
"The only intention of putting the condition is to note the presence on that date as directed. Such specific direction does not amount to suggest that the Investigating Officer cannot relax the time or the date for marking presence. The Officer could have reported before the concerned Court of the inconvenience of the accused and rather should have accommodated the accused. Invoking the delay in time in marking presence as a ground for cancellation of the bail, cannot be considered as supervening circumstances for cancellation of bail," the Court explained.
The Court further stated that conditions requiring regular appearances before the Investigating Officer could lead to unnecessary friction and potentially enable the Officer to undermine the Court's order, particularly in this case where the applicant was permitted to attend 'Haj'. The Court also indicated that the intentions of the Police in this matter needed scrutiny.
Consequently, the Court allowed the application, deeming the order of the Judicial Magistrate as 'unjust, illegal, and improper,' and thus quashed and set it aside. Additionally, the Court cancelled the order forfeiting the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/-, directing that this amount be returned to the applicant, who, upon returning from 'Haj,' is to mark their presence before the concerned Court.
Case Title: Kadarsha Latifsha Saiyed Thro Jamilsha Kadarsha Saiyed vs State Of Gujarat & Anr
LL Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (Guj) 96