BHAGIRATH SINGH S-O MAHIPAT SINGH JUDEJA v. STATE OF GUJARAT

Citation: [1984] 1 S.C.R. 839

Court: Supreme Court of India

Bench: D.A. DESAI, R.B. MISRA

Case summary

If there is no ·:prima facie case there is no question of considering other circnm· stances, But even where a prima facie case is established, the • . PraCtice-Bailgranted by Sesons Judge by ·a Well reasoned order-Set aside by High Court~Supreme Cnw·t 'ro in"terfere .

Judgment text

. . . BfiAGIRATH SINH S/O MAH! PAT SINGH JUJ;>EJA. V. STATE OF GUJARAT • November 2l, 1983 (D. A. DESAI AND R. B. MIS! lA, JJ. ] Criminal. Procedure-Batl~For canrellatio'! of hail very cogent and overWhelming circ1u11stances are neressar~'· . PraCtice-Bailgranted by Sesons Judge by ·a Well reasoned order-Set aside by High Court~Supreme Cnw·t 'ro in"terfere . if approach "adopted by Higl} . , Court is not commencjing.. The appellant, against whom an offence under sec. 307 I. P. C. had been registered for giving knife blows·to »'l person Was gra_nted bail by the Sessions Judge. On applicat_icin by the State, a Sirigle Judge _of the High Court cancelled the. bail. Hence this appeal by spe~ial leave. • Allowing ttie a·ppeal, lJELD : Very ~ogent and -over~helming circumstances are n·ecessary for an. order seeking cancellation. Ofthe bail and the trend today is towards granting bail because it.

is now well·settled that the power to grant bail is ·not to' be exercised as if the punishment before ~aril is being imposed. The only n1:iterial consjdeiations in such asituation are whether the. accused would be readily available for his trial and whether he is likely to abuse the discretion'granted in his·favour by ta111pering with evidence. {842 D-E] In the instant case the _order made by ,the High Court is conspicuous by its silence on these. two relevant consideratioii,S. The learned Judge was impressed bY some of the most irreievant considerations and misdirected h_imself. The circumstances found by him that the victim attacked was a social and politicalworker could not be considered so overridiilg· as to permit interference. by the"' High Court with the discretionary Order of _the Sessioris Judge grU:nting _bail. The High Court coffipletely. overlooked the fact that it.

was not for it ·to decide whether the bail shoU:Id- be gra"nted bllt the application before it was for cancellation On the bail. L842 B. q "' • CRIMINAL APPELLATE . JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal 'No. 658 of. 1983. " 840 SUPRBMB COURT REPORTS. [1984) i s. c. R. ··· · Es. . piaie how that circumstance should be considered so overriding as to • ·•permit interference with a discreationary order of the learned Sessions Judge granting bail. The High Court completely overlooked the fact that it was 'not for it to decide whether the bail should be granted but . th<! applicatio11 before it was for· cancellation of the bail. Very cogant and·oveiwhelming circumstances are necessary for an· order seeking cancellation oft. he bail. ·And, the . trend today is tow~rds granting bail because it is now well-settled by a catena of decisions of this Court that the power to grant bail is not to be exercised as if ·the . ~ ·)1tinishment before'tri~l is bei~g imposed.

The only material consi- -tlerations in stich a situati()n are whether the accused would be readily ~vailable for . his trial and whether he is likely to abuse the discretion granted in his favm1r by tampering with evidence. The . order made by the High Court is con. sp,icuous by its silence on these two relevant considerations. ·It is for these reasons that we consider in the interest of justice a compelling necessity to' intetfere w'ith the order m~de by ~he High Court,. " We accordingly allow this appeal and· set aside the order i;nade by the learned High Court Judge and ·restore the ·. one . made. by the learned Sessions Judge . with following modifications: ,G. (i) ·The appellant shall be release~ or ifhe is on ! )ail continue to be on bail on his furnishing two fresh bail-bonds . each . in the amount of Rs. 5000 supported by a solvent security. • (ii) ·The appellant shall report on, first Monday every · morith before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rajkot at 11. 00 A. M.

till liis trial commences.. Thereafter BHAGIRATHSJN_H v. ouiARAT (Desai, J. ) 843 he would be subject to the further orders that may be made in this behalf by the court which would A try him. (iii) Other copditions imposed by the learned Sessions Judge remain . un-altered. • B Order accordingly. H. S. K. Appeal al/ow. ed:. " • .