"Be Sensitive": J&K High Court Urges Trial Courts To Avoid 'Copy-Paste' Practices In Bail Orders

A bench Justice Sanjay Dhar has emphasized that courts must avoid the “copy-paste syndrome” that has infiltrated judicial proceedings, as such practices can compromise the fundamental rights of individuals.

Justice Dhar made these observations in a plea involving petitioner Umar Bashir Khan, who sought bail in connection with FIR registered under Sections 451, 376/511, 354, and 506 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC).

These observations came in a case involving one Umar Bashir Khan, who sought bail in connection with FIR registered under Sections 451, 376/511, 354, and 506 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC). Khan was accused of trespassing into the prosecutrix's house, assaulting her, attempting sexual assault, and issuing life threats.

The prosecutrix had earlier filed a complaint in December 2018, alleging that during the night of December 5–6, the petitioner entered her house and attacked her. She claimed that he attempted to sexually assault her and threatened her life. Following these allegations, the police registered an FIR, recorded her statement under Section 164 of the CrPC, and filed a chargesheet in 2021, establishing offenses under the stated sections.

While the case progressed, the petitioner remained in custody in connection with another FIR under the NDPS Act. Upon his release from that case, he applied for bail in this case, which was denied by the trial court in September 2024. The trial court's denial relied on an incorrect set of facts, suggesting that the petitioner had sexually exploited the prosecutrix on the pretext of marriage a claim unrelated to the actual case.

Khan's counsel argued that the trial court had rejected the bail application mechanically, without examining the facts of the case or the evidence on record. It was submitted that the prosecutrix, during her testimony in court, had resiled from her earlier allegations, stating that the incident stemmed from a family dispute.

After examining the submissions and evidence, Justice Sanjay Dhar strongly criticized the trial court's handling of the bail application. The High Court found that the trial court's reasoning relied on an entirely irrelevant narrative that had no bearing on the petitioner's case.

Justice Dhar remarked,

“From a perusal of the afore-quoted observations of the trial court and, in fact, from a perusal of the order passed by the trial court on 02.09.2024 as a whole, it appears that the said court has decided the bail application of the petitioner on the basis of facts of some other case”

The court added,

“This clearly reflects absolute non-application of mind and casual approach on the part of the trial court. It is unimaginable that an officer of the level of a Sessions Judge would approach the bail application... in such a casual manner.”

The High Court noted that the prosecutrix's testimony in court contradicted her initial allegations. She admitted that the incident arose from a family dispute and stated that no sexual assault had occurred. This, Justice Dhar observed, created reasonable doubt about the petitioner's involvement in the alleged offense of attempted rape.

Highlighting the importance of judicial diligence, the judgment stated, “Even a single day's delay in granting bail to a person who is otherwise entitled to it amounts to violation of his fundamental right to life and liberty.”

Granting bail to the petitioner with a bond of ₹25,000 the High Court used the occasion to issue broader guidance to subordinate courts. Justice Dhar directed that courts must remain vigilant and avoid the pitfalls of a copy-paste approach in deciding bail applications.

“..It is impressed upon the criminal courts to remain sensitive and careful while dealing with bail applications and avoid the copy-paste syndrome which, of late, has crept in the functioning of the courts.”, the court concluded.

Case Title: Umar Bashir Khan Vs UT of J&K

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (JKL) 356

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment