In Upendra Manjhi & Ors. vs. The State of Bihar, Supreme Court's bench of Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma heard the counsel for the petitioner who has challenged Patna High Court's order dated September 11, 2024.
Reacting to the High Court's order, Supreme Court observed: "This is one of the few orders we have come across in last few days passed by the High Court, in which, without deciding the matter on merits, the High Court has granted the bail to the present petitioner, subject to the condition that the petitioner-accused shall furnish the bail bonds after five months of the passing of the order. There are no reasons assigned as to why the implementation of the order granting bail was postponed for five months. In our opinion, no such condition could be imposed for grant of bail to a person/accused. If the Court is satisfied on merits, it should grant bail or otherwise, reject the same."
The Court's order reads:"In that view of the matter, without issuing notice to the respondent-State, the impugned order dated 11.09.2024, is set aside. It is directed that the Criminal Miscellaneous No. 63191 of 2024, filed by the petitioner, shall be restored on the file of the High Court, and shall be listed before the concerned Court on 11.11.2024, for deciding the matter/ application afresh on merits, and in accordance with law." Now Justice Nawneet Kumar Pandey will have to hear bail application afresh.
Notably, in July 12, 2024 also the Supreme Court's bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih had criticised the trend of Patna High Court to pass conditional bail orders that state that the bail shall come into effect after a period of six months or a year. It had set aside a High Court's order. Justice Dr. Anshuman of High Court had said that a murder-accused should be released on bail, but only after six months in Jitendra Paswan vs. The State of Bihar.
No comments:
Post a Comment