In Matters Pertaining To Citizens' Liberty, Courts Should Act Promptly; Avoid Detailed Deliberation Of Evidence In Bail Pleas : Supreme Court
Inordinate delay in passing an order pertaining to liberty of a citizen is not in tune with the constitutional mandate, the Supreme Court observed in an order allowing anticipatory bail plea.In this case, the High Court had rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by the accused. The Supreme Court, granted him ad interim protection observing that (i) it was a cross case arising out...
Inordinate delay in passing an order pertaining to liberty of a citizen is not in tune with the constitutional mandate, the Supreme Court observed in an order allowing anticipatory bail plea.
In this case, the High Court had rejected the anticipatory bail application filed by the accused. The Supreme Court, granted him ad interim protection observing that (i) it was a cross case arising out of civil dispute. (ii) Prima facie there was no material to show that the provisions of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, were invoked. (iii) That there was a delay of six days in lodging the FIR.
In an order making this ad interim protection absolute, the bench noted that the petitioner’s custodial interrogation would not be necessary for the offenes alleged with.
The bench of Justices B R Gavai, Vikram Nath and Sanjay Karol noticed that the High Court, by an order running into 13 pages, has rejected the application.
"Detailed elaboration of evidence has to be avoided at the stage of grant/rejection of bail/anticipatory bail. We do not appreciate such a lengthy elaboration of evidence at this stage.", the court said in this regard.
The bench further noticed that though the order was reserved on 25.01.2023, the High Court has pronounced the order on 01.03.2023 i.e. after a period of one month and one week.
"It is always said that in the matters pertaining to liberty of citizens, the Court should act promptly. In our view, such an inordinate delay in passing an order pertaining to liberty of a citizen is not in tune with the constitutional mandate.", the court observed.
Case details
Sumit Subhaschandra Gangwal vs State of Maharashtra | 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 373 | SLP(Crl) 3561/2023 | 27 April 2023 | Justices B R Gavai, Vikram Nath and Sanjay Karol
Headnotes
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ; Section 438 - Anticipatory Bail - Detailed elaboration of evidence has to be avoided at the stage of grant/rejection of bail/anticipatory bail. We do not appreciate such a lengthy elaboration of evidence at this stage - In the matters pertaining to liberty of citizens, the Court should act promptly - An inordinate delay in passing an order pertaining to liberty of a citizen is not in tune with the constitutional mandate.