Personal Morality Should Not Guide Bail Decisions: SC
The accused was booked in Ratlam district under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita: Reports
NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has said courts should refrain from imposing a presiding judge’s personal views or value judgments on morality while deciding bail applications or conducting criminal trials.
A bench of Justice Ujjal Bhuyan and Justice A.S. Chandurkar made the observation while setting aside a Madhya Pradesh High Court order denying bail to an accused in a sexual assault case.
The High Court had held that granting bail could have ramifications for the social order and the “morals” of the complainant’s family.
“We are of the view that courts should refrain from imposing the personal views or value judgement of the Presiding Judge on morality or otherwise while adjudicating a matter relating to bail, or even a criminal trial of an accused,” the bench said in its September 23 order.
The Supreme Court said a reading of the High Court’s March 20 order showed that these considerations had formed the basis for denying bail.
The accused was booked in Ratlam district under provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
According to the allegations, the accused was a tenant living near the complainant’s home. Despite being married, he allegedly attempted to abduct her elder sister, leading to the registration of a separate case.
The complainant subsequently told her mother that he had sexually exploited her for about a month, resulting in the present case.
Counsel for the accused argued that the case arose from his relationship with the elder sister and had been registered to harass him over that involvement.
The Supreme Court noted that the accused had spent more than a year in custody and that the trial would take further time to conclude.
“Insofar as the present case is concerned, we find that appellant has already undergone more than one year of incarceration. It would take some more time for the trial to conclude.
“In such circumstances, we are of the view that a case for bail is made out,” it said.
Setting aside the High Court order, the bench directed that the accused be produced before the jurisdictional special court within seven days and released on bail on conditions deemed appropriate by that court.