Challenge against the order cancelling the bail application
2) The instant appeals are directed against the orders of even date, i.e., 12th December, 2023 passed by the learned Single Judge of High Court of Madhya Pradesh Bench at Gwalior in Miscellaneous Criminal Case Nos. 43154 of 2023 and 43149 of 2023, whereby the bail granted to the appellants was cancelled on applications filed by the State under Section 439(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter being referred to as ‘CrPC’).
3) The appellants herein were arrested in connection with the FIR being Crime No. 21/2022 registered at P.S. Dinara District, Shivpuri for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 470 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1960 (hereinafter being referred to as ‘IPC’) and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act.
4) Learned Single Judge sitting at Gwalior Bench of High Court of Madhya Pradesh accepted the bail applications being Miscellaneous Criminal Case Nos. 42299/2022 and 44360/2022 preferred by the appellants under Section 439 CrPC vide orders dated 8th September, 2022 and 14th November, 2022.
Appellants were added solely on the basis of confessional statements
5) It may be stated here that the appellants herein were not apprehended at the time of registration of the FIR and were not named therein. They were implicated in the case solely on the basis of confessional statements made by the coaccused persons. Chargesheet had been filed by the time the appellants were granted bail by the learned Single Judge vide order dated 8th September, 2022 and 14th September, 2022.
6) The State preferred applications under Section 439(2) CrPC seeking cancellation of regular bail granted to the appellants herein.
Cancellation of bail came before the single judge who had not granted the bail
7) Surprisingly, the applications for cancellation of bail came to be listed before learned Single Judge of the Gwalior Bench of High Court of Madhya Pradesh (other than the learned Single Judge who had granted bail who had granted bail to the accused) who accepted the same vide impugned orders of the same date, i.e. 12th December, 2023 adverting to the merits of the case and by observing that the independent role of the accused may vary but collectively their role appears to be challenging and has wider ramifications in respect of national security and cyber crime. The Aadhar cards and some copies recovered from the accused could be used in NDPS offences, terrorism related activities, cyber frauds, kidnapping, ransom purposes and for offences of grievous denominations.
The learned Single Judge placed the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Abdul Basit @ Raju and Others v. Mohd. Abdul Kadir Chaudhary and Another [(2014)10 SCC 754] for cancellation.
Cancelling the bail which granted by another single judge by examining the merits tantamount to judicial impropriety/indiscipline
10) Having heard and considered the submissions advanced by learned counsel for the parties and after going through the impugned orders dated 12th December, 2023 and so also the orders granting bail dated 8th September, 2022 and 14th September, 2022, we are of the firm opinion that the exercise of jurisdiction by the learned Single Judge of High Court of Madhya Pradesh in cancelling the bail granted to the appellants by another Single Judge of the same High Court and that too, by examining the merits of the allegations was totally uncalled for and tantamount to judicial impropriety/indiscipline.
11. While cancelling the bail granted to the appellants, the learned Single Judge referred to this Court’s judgment in the case of Abdul Basit (supra). However, we are compelled to note that the ratio of the above judgment favours the case of the appellants. That apart, the judgment deals with the powers of the High Court to review its own order within the limited scope of Section 362 CrPC.
Law regarding difference between grant of bail and cancellation thereof
12. Law is well settled by a catena of judgments rendered by this Court that the considerations for grant of bail and cancellation thereof are entirely different. Bail granted to an accused can only be cancelled if the Court is satisfied that after being released on bail, (a) the accused has misused the liberty granted to him; (b) flouted the conditions of bail order; (c) that the bail was granted in ignorance of statutory provisions restricting the powers of the Court to grant bail; (d) or that the bail was procured by misrepresentation or fraud. In the present case, none of these situations existed.
Cancellation of bail should come before the same judge who granted bail
13. We fail to understand how the application seeking cancellation of bail came to be listed before a Single Judge other than the learned Single Judge who had granted bail to the appellants.
14. Under normal circumstances, the application for cancellation of bail filed on merits as opposed to violation of the conditions of the bail order should have been placed before the same learned Single Judge who had granted bail to the accused. The learned Single Judge, while passing the impugned orders dated 12th December, 2023 has virtually reviewed the orders granting bail to the appellants dated 8th September, 2022 and 14th September, 2022 by another Single Judge of the same High Court. We feel that such exercise of jurisdiction tantamounted to gross impropriety.
related: Second or successive bail application: Mentioning the details of previous bail application is compulsory to avoid contempt – section1.in
2 Comments
[…] heard to the appellant-accused on the issue of cancellation of bail, has straight away proceeded to cancel the bail granted to him. Such approach on the part of the High Court cannot be countenanced especially when the High […]
[…] Cancellation of bail: Cancelling the bail which granted by another single judge by examining the mer… […]