The judgments provided in this article highlight the law laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court on the provisions of bail under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The law on bail is an integral part of the Indian criminal judicial process and by way of the judgments the Supreme Court has laid down concrete guidelines which direct the process of grant or denial of bail to an applicant before the judiciary. Section 436 to 450 of the Code of Criminal Procedure pertains to the law on bail, which as a legal concept can be understood as obtaining a conditional release from prison while awaiting or undergoing trial. Bail is granted against the payment or deposit of a security to ensure the appearance of an accused before the court and/or police authorities.
The Supreme Court in the judgements provided below has decided integral issues pertaining to the law on bail. Some of these issues are: -
The guidelines to be followed while hearing applications for bail by the judiciary.
The period within which bail applications should be disposed of by the judiciary.
The procedure to be followed by the police authorities in the case of bailable vis-à-vis non-bailable offence.
The restrictions and powers of sessions and high courts while entertaining bail applications.
Process regarding release on bail and the cancellation of bail.
The distinction in the concept and procedure for obtaining anticipatory bail vis-à-vis ordinary bail.
Conditions demanding grant or refusal of bail.
Powers of a magistrate to detain an accused and to release such accused on bail.
The right to be released on bail under provisions of the code of criminal procedure.
Guidelines regarding suspension of sentence during pendency of criminal appeal.
The Supreme Court elaborated on the issues being adjudicated in the below cases and came to firm conclusions on each of such issues framed. The Supreme Court categorically held that bail applications must be disposed of normally within the period of one week to ensure speedy delivery of justice. The Supreme Court further held that the grant and refusal of bail depends upon the sole discretion of the court and such a decision is based on the facts and circumstances of each case. The court further elaborated the guiding factors for a court to keep in mind while discharging a bail application. The court has further held that the right to be released on bail is the rule and not the exception and the authorities are bound to release a person on bail upon terms decided by the authorities. The court also stated that the conditions imposed by a court while granting bail have to conform to the law and cannot be contrary to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In a judgment the court has also elaborated upon the time from which the bail is effective while grant of anticipatory bail versus ordinary bail. The Supreme Court has also held that an accused has a right to be released on bail under Section 167(2) of the code of criminal procedure even in grave and serious offences. The court has also laid down exhaustive guidelines to be followed while hearing bail applications.
Supreme Court of India
Sanjay Chandra vs Cbi on 23 November, 2011
Author: ..................J.
Bench: G.S. Singhvi, H.L. Dattu
REPORTABLE
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.2178 OF 2011
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 5650 of 2011)
Sanjay Chandra ............ Appellant
versus
CBI ............ Respondent
J U D G M E N T
H.L. DATTU, J.
1) Leave granted in all the Special Leave Petitions.
2) These appeals are directed against the common Judgment and Order of the learned Single Judge of the High Court of Delhi, dated 23rd May 2011 in Bail Application No. 508/2011, Bail Application No. 509/2011 & Crl. M.A. 653/2011, Bail Application No. 510/2011, Bail Application No. 511/2011 and Bail Application No. 512/2011, by which the learned Single Judge refused to grant bail to the accused-appellants. These cases were argued together and submitted for decision as one case.
3) The offence alleged against each of the accused, as noticed by the Ld. Special Judge, CBI, New Delhi, who rejected bail applications of the appellants, vide his order dated 20.4.2011, is extracted for easy reference :
Sanjay Chandra (A7) in Crl. Appeal No. 2178 of 2011 [arising out of SLP (Crl.)No.5650 of 2011]:
"6. The allegations against accused Sanjay Chandra are that he entered into criminal conspiracy with accused A. Raja, R.K.
Chandolia and other accused persons during September 2009 to get UAS licence for providing telecom services to otherwise an ineligible company to get UAS licences. He, as Managing Director of M/s Unitech Wireless (Tamil Nadu) Limited, was looking after the business of telecom through 8 group companies of Unitech Limited. The first-come-first- served procedure of allocation of UAS Licences and spectrum was manipulated by the accused persons in order to benefit M/s Unitech Group Companies. The cutoff date of 25.09.2007 was decided by accused public servants of DoT primarily to allow consideration of Unitech group applications for UAS licences. The Unitech Group Companies were in business of realty and even the objects of companies were not changed to `telecom' and registered as required before applying. The companies were ineligible to get the licences till the grant of UAS licences. The Unitech Group was almost last within the applicants considered for allocation of UAS licences and as per existing policy of first-come-first-served, no licence could be issued in as many as 10 to 13 circles where sufficient spectrum was not available. The Unitech companies got benefit of spectrum in as many as 10 circles over the other eligible applicants. Accused Sanjay Chandra, in conspiracy with accused public servants, was aware of the whole design of the allocation of LOIs and on behalf of the Unitech group companies was ready with the drafts of Rs. 1658 crores as early as 10th October, 2007.".....
Download complete judgement by clicking on the button given below >>
The judgements in this article discuss the law on the provisions of bail under the code of criminal procedure. The law on bail is enshrined under Sections 436 to 450 of the code, which categorize offences under the code as bailable and non-bailable offences. Further the code also provides for different kinds of bail such as regular bail, interim bail and finally anticipatory bail. The Supreme court in the judgments has analysed the above provisions in detail and the principles guiding the grant of the three kinds of bail for both bailable and non-bailable offences. The court has examined the law in great detail to lay down precedents to provide for every contingency in a matter regarding grant or denial of bail by the judiciary.
Bail is an intricate concept of criminal jurisprudence which is integral to protect the liberties of an accused undergoing or awaiting trial. It is important to engage and avail the services of an expert criminal lawyer to gain an understanding of these intricacies of law pertaining to bail. A good lawyer can ensure that you get the best advice and representation while applying for bail and your case is represented as best as possible.