Supreme Court Rejects Bail Condition for Accused After Charge Sheet Submission
Click to start listening
Synopsis
The Supreme Court has altered a Patna High Court anticipatory bail order that demanded the trial court to incarcerate the accused upon charge sheet submission. The court highlighted the need for the trial court to make independent decisions regarding the bail without a coercive mandate.
Key Takeaways
- The Supreme Court revised an anticipatory bail order.
- Patna High Court's directive for immediate incarceration was deemed inappropriate.
- Trial courts should independently assess cases upon charge sheet submission.
- The petitioner is required to appear before the court within three weeks.
- Interim protection granted earlier has been extended.
New Delhi, March 20 (NationPress) The Supreme Court has revised a segment of an anticipatory bail ruling from the Patna High Court that mandated the trial court to undertake all "coercive measures to ensure that the accused is incarcerated" following the submission of the charge sheet.
A panel consisting of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra remarked that the Patna High Court, after granting pre-arrest bail due to the lack of significant evidence against the accused at that moment, should have allowed the trial court to decide based on the charge sheet submission.
“The petitioner's legal representative is right in asserting that a definitive instruction mandating the trial court to impose custody upon submission of the charge sheet was inappropriate. The Patna High Court could have merely permitted the trial court to evaluate the situation once the petitioner appeared, without an obligatory order for custody,” stated the Justice Amanullah-led panel.
In a controversial ruling made in August of the previous year, the Patna High Court indicated that "if the charge sheet is filed against the petitioner linking him to the crime, the existing anticipatory bail order shall be rendered ineffective, and the trial court must undertake all coercive actions to ensure the petitioner is jailed".
During the apex court proceedings, the petitioner's counsel argued that the stipulation regarding the accused's detention upon charge sheet submission was inappropriate.
Without making significant alterations to the anticipatory bail ruling, the apex court adjusted the contested condition. "We modify the directive in the concluding paragraph to state that as the charge sheet has now been filed against the petitioner, he must present himself before the Court regarding the bail matter in accordance with legal standards, without bias from the contested order", ordered the Justice Amanullah-led panel.
Furthermore, the court instructed the petitioner to appear before the relevant court within three weeks, while extending the interim protection previously granted.
