Section 439

Tags: CrPC, Bail, section 439

CrPC

Bail - Cancellation of - Court granting bail did not consider material facts or crucial circumstances

Consequences of pre-trial detention - Are deleterious; and that keeping an undertrial in jail seriously jeopardises the preparation of his legal defence

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S. 439 - Bail - Consequences of pre-trial detention - Are deleterious; and that keeping an undertrial in jail seriously jeopardises the preparation of his legal defence - If kept in custody, the applicant will not be able to effectively brief and consult with his lawyers, collate evidence in his defence and thereby defend himself effectively - Thereby the applicant will be denied his right to fair trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution . #2020 SCeJ 1241 (Del.)

Difference between grant of bail under Section 439 of the CrPC in case of pre-trial arrest and suspension of sentence under Section 389 of the CrPC and grant of bail, post conviction

Possibility of the applicant committing any further offence is concerned, that ground is purely speculative and conjectural

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, S. 439 - Bail - Possibility of the applicant committing any further offence - Possibility of the applicant committing any further offence is concerned, that ground is purely speculative and conjectural - So is the possibility of the applicant offering any inducement, threat or promise to any prosecution witness or other such person - Possibility of the applicant absconding also appears to be farfetched and can be addressed by imposing appropriate conditions of bail. #2020 SCeJ 1241 (Del.)

Nowhere is it the law that an accused, yet to be tried, is to be kept in custody only on a hunch or a presumption that he will prejudice or impede trial; or to send any message to the society

Bail – Nowhere is it the law that an accused, yet to be tried, is to be kept in custody only on a hunch or a presumption that he will prejudice or impede trial; or to send any message to the society - If anything, the only message that goes-out to the society by keeping an accused in prison before finding him guilty, is that our system works only on impressions and conjectures and can keep an accused in custody even on presumption of guilt - While in certain cases such message may even quench the thirst for revenge of the lay society against a person they believe to be guilty, such action would certainly not leave our criminal justice system awash in glory - An investigating agency must come to court with the confidence that they have arrested an accused, based on credible material, and have filed a complaint or a charge-sheet with the certainty that they will be able to bring home guilt, by satisfying a court beyond reasonable doubt - But when an investigating agency suggests that an accused be detained in custody as an undertrial for a prolonged period, even after the complaint or charge-sheet has been filed, it appears that the investigating agency is not convinced of its case and so it fears that the accused may ‘get-off’ by discharge or acquittal; and that therefore the only way to `punish’ the accused is to let him remain in custody as an undertrial - Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 Sections #2020 SCeJ 1241 (Del.)