Supreme Court Sets Aside 'Moratorium' Of 1 Year Imposed By High Court To Apply For Bail Afresh
Today, the Supreme Court set aside a condition imposed by the Patna High Court wherein, while denying bail to a petitioner, the High Court stated that the accused can only seek bail afresh after one year of the framing of the charges.The Court observed that the High Court could not have imposed a "moratorium of one year" for moving fresh bail application.Modifying the High Court's order, a...
Today, the Supreme Court set aside a condition imposed by the Patna High Court wherein, while denying bail to a petitioner, the High Court stated that the accused can only seek bail afresh after one year of the framing of the charges.
The Court observed that the High Court could not have imposed a "moratorium of one year" for moving fresh bail application.
Modifying the High Court's order, a bench of Justices Pankaj Mithal and S.V.N. Bhatti allowed the accused-petitioner to seek bail afresh irrespective of the condition imposed by the High Court.
The Bench observed :
"The High Court by the impugned order dated 7.8.24 has declined to enlarge the petitioner on bail but has granted him liberty to renew his prayer for bail after one year of the framing of the charge. The petitioner is aggrieved by the condition so imposed, fixing moratorium for one year for moving of fresh bail after the framing of the charges. We are of the considered opinion that the High Court while granting liberty to renew the prayer for bail could not have imposed such a condition and ought to the permitted filing of the fresh bail application after the charges are framed. In the case at hand, the charges have been framed and therefore, the petitioner is set at liberty to renew his prayer for the bail before the High Court notwithstanding the moratorium of one year imposed. The impugned order stands modified to the above extent. SLP disposed of."
By the above order, the Supreme Court modified para 6 of the High Court's order which says, "6. In the present facts and circumstances of this case and the submissions made above, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the Petitioner. However, he is at liberty that he may renew his prayer for bail one year after framing of charge.”
The petitioner is accused of assaulting the complainant's father and attacking him with a sword on his head.
Case Details: MD GULZAR Vs STATE OF BIHAR|SLP(Crl) No. 805/2025
SLP has been filed through Advocate Ashish Choudhury and Advocate Sulaiman Mohd Khan appeared for petitioner.
