Supreme Court Deprecates Recent Trend Of Courts Deciding Bail Pleas Without Giving Specific Reasons

While setting aside the bail granted to a rape-accused, the Supreme Court expressed concerns at the "recent trend" of Courts passing bail orders without providing sufficient reasons.

"There is a recent trend of passing such orders granting or refusing to grant bail, where the Courts make a general observation that "the facts and the circumstances" have been considered. No specific reasons are indicated which precipitated the passing of the order by the Court.Such a situation continues despite various judgments of this Court wherein this Court has disapproved of such a practice", the Court observed.

The bench comprising by Chief Justice of India NV Ramana and Justice Krishna Murari observed that the High Court Court has not considered any of the relevant factors for grant of bail.

"Reasoning is the life blood of the judicial system. That every order must be reasoned is one of the fundamental tenets of our system. An unreasoned order suffers the vice of arbitrariness", the bench added.

The allegation against the accused was that he had called the prosecuterix to his room and forcibly raped her on two occasions. In her appeal before the Apex court, she contended that the the High Court erred in granting bail to the accused in a mechanical manner without any reasoning. 

The court observed that certain important factors that are always considered for grant of bail, inter­alia, relate to prima facie involvement of the accused, nature and gravity of the charge, severity of the punishment, and the character, position and standing of the accused.

"Apart from the general observation that the facts and circumstances of the case have been taken into account, nowhere have the actual facts of the case been adverted to. There appears to be no reference to the factors that ultimately led the High Court to grant bail. In fact, no reasoning is apparent from the impugned order", the court observed after perusing the High Court order.

The court further noted that the impugned order passed by the High Court is cryptic, and does not suggest any application of mind. 

Case details

Ms. Y vs State of Rajasthan | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 384 | CrA 649 of 2022 | 19 April 2022

Coram: CJI NV Ramana and Krishna Murari

Appearances :  Mr. Rishi Matoliya, AOR for petitioner Ms. Vidisha Swarup, Adv for the State of Rajasthan , Mr. Anuj Bhandari, Adv for second respondent.

Headnotes

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ; Section 439 - Bail - A recent trend of passing such orders granting or refusing to grant bail, where the Courts make a general observation that "the facts and the circumstances" have been considered - Such a situation continues despite various judgments of this Court wherein this Court has disapproved of such a practice. [Referred to Mahipal v. Rajesh Kumar, (2020) 2 SCC 118 ] (Para 13)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ; Section 439 - Bail - Parameters which must be considered while granting bail discussed - certain important factors that are always considered, inter­alia, relate to prima facie involvement of the accused, nature and gravity of the charge, severity of the punishment, and the character, position and standing of the accused - At the stage of granting bail the Court is not required to enter into a detailed analysis of the evidence in the case.  (Para 8-10)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ; Section 439 - Bail - Appellate Court required to analyze whether the order granting bail was illegal, perverse, unjustified or arbitrary. On the other hand, an application for cancellation of bail looks at whether supervening circumstances have occurred warranting cancellation. (Para 11-15)

Judgment and order-  Reasoning is the life blood of the judicial system. That every order must be reasoned is one of the fundamental tenets of our system. An unreasoned order suffers the vice of arbitrariness. (Para 18)

Summary : Appeal against Rajasthan HC order granting bail to appellant accused of rape of his niece - Allowed - The impugned order passed by the High Court is cryptic, and does not suggest any application of mind. 

Click Here To Read/Download Judgment