Supreme Court has cautioned courts against mechanically granting bail in heinous offences, saying the charge's seriousness is a basic consideration before setting an accused free on bail.
A recent judgment by a Bench led by Justice Indira Banerjee set aside a Kerala High Court order bailing out a man accused of stabbing to death a 30-year-old dentist in front of her father in September 2020. The accused had gone absconding for several days before his arrest.
Supreme Court has cautioned courts against mechanically granting bail in heinous offences.
The apex court observed that the nature of the offense is one of the basic considerations for the grant of bail. The more heinous the crime is, the greater the chance of rejection of the bail.
Further, the court said that the power to grant bail under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C is discretionary. The court also stated that such discretion has to be exercised judiciously by courts.
In this case, the crime of the accused is heinous. Moreover, he could be arrested only after receipt of secret information by the investigation agency. Thus, granting bail was not justified.
India has a single integrated system of Judiciary in view of a single Constitution. The judiciary in India acts as the custodian of the Indian Constitution and the protector of the Fundamental Rights.
The Supreme Court of India is the highest court of the land as established by Part V, Chapter IV of the Constitution of India.
According to the Constitution of India, the role of the Supreme Court is that of a federal court, guardian of the Constitution and the highest court of appeal.
Articles 124 to 147 of the Constitution of India lay down the composition and jurisdiction of the Supreme Court of India.
Primarily, it is an appellate court which takes up appeals against judgments of the provincial High Courts. But it also takes writ petitions in cases of serious human rights violations or if a case involves a serious issue that needs immediate resolution.
