E-Copies Of Bail Orders Sufficient For Release; Certified Copies Not Necessary: Telangana High Court

The court has ruled that an order copy from the High Court's Website along with case details which are available in the case status information would suffice from 22.11.2021. The court has also made it clear that the new directions will apply to all bail applications including bails in Criminal Revision as well as Criminal Appeals.

When a memo is filed on behalf of the accused for furnishing sureties, the advocate is required to state in the memo that the order has been downloaded from the High Court Website, which will be verified by the administrative officer of the court. The officer can then make an endorsement to that effect and place it before the court.

"The Presiding Officer, on the same day, shall dispose of the same and dispatch the release order to the jail authorities concerned forthwith through e-mail or any other electronic mode", one of the high court directions that follow notes.

In cases for anticipatory bail, the Station House Officer is entrusted with the duty to verify the authenticity of order copy furnished.

A single-judge bench of Justice Lalita Kanneganti was hearing the anticipatory bail application filed by the head of a job consultancy firm in Secundarabad, primarily accused of cheating under Section 420 IPC. While hearing the application under Section 438 CrPC, the court noted that when the punishment for an offence is below seven years, police officials are obligated to follow the apex court guidelines in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, and follow the procedure under Section 41-A CrPC by issuing a notice demanding the appearance of the accused.

The court hence underscored that if the police is not following the procedure, and resorting to other means and measures by threatening the petitioner accused to compromise the matter, petitioner is at liberty to initiate appropriate proceedings against the officers concerned.

When the petitioner requested a copy of the order on the same day because of the apprehension that the police may take coercive steps, Justice Lalita Kanneganti delved into the matter in detail. The Court acknowledged the delay in dispatching the certified copies of the orders, even when the bail applications are adjudicated expeditiously.

Recalling Justice Krishna Iyer's comment that "our judicial system is 200 years behind when compared to other developed countries", the court observed:

"Once the signed orders leave the Chambers of the Judge and by the time the advocate/client receives the certified copy it has to pass through several phases of Scrutiny and approval. In some cases, it may take days together This for dispatching the order due to invariable reasons. procedure of dispatching the order copies has been followed by the Courts from a very long time."

Noting that it is about time to utilise the advanced technologies at our disposal, the Court referred to FASTER (Fast and Secured Transmission of Electronic Records) adopted by Supreme Court for speedy communication of bail orders to prisons under an electronic transmission channel. Article 21, Sections 438 and 439 of CrPC are safeguards for the right of accused to be not deprived of their personal liberty arbitrarily, the Court observed.

"Denial of this right undermines public confidence in the justice-delivery system. It is also a settled law that the right of an accused to nave his bail application heard by the Court within a reasonable time has been entrenched as a constitutional liberty. At the same time, disposal of bail application without furnishing the order copy within a reasonable time will not place the accused in a better position", the court made its opinion clear in the bail order.

The High Court has also directed that a copy of the order lifting the mandatory requirement of certified copies must be communicated to the Home Ministry, Director General of Police, Director of Prosecution, Principal District Judges and Bar Associations.

The court aims to sensitise concerned Ministry and police functionaries, judges, advocates and clients through this multifaceted grassroots level approach. The court has also adopted a broad consultation process by asking the judicial officers and police officials( in case of anticipatory bails) to notify any difficulties in implementing the court's directions through Registrar(Judicial) and Public Prosecutor respectively on 22^nd December.

Case Title: V. Bharath Kumar v. State of Telangana

Case No: CRL.P. No. 8108/ 2021

Also Read: Delay In Communication Of Bail Orders To Jail Authorities Affects Human Liberty, Must Be Addressed On War Footing: Justice DY Chandrachud