MS.Y versus STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.

Citation: [2022] 3 S.C.R. 27 · Decided: 19-04-2022 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.V. RAMANA · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Cited by 2 judgment(s) · cites 7 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
27
   [2022] 3 S.C.R. 27
27
MS.Y
v.
STATE OF RAJASTHAN AND ANR.
(Criminal Appeal No. 649 of 2022)
APRIL 19, 2022
[N. V. RAMANA, CJI AND KRISHNA MURARI, J.]
Bail – Necessity of reasoned bail orders, especially in matters
involving serious offences – In the present case, respondent no.2
was accused of committing the grievous offence of raping his young
niece of nineteen years – Held: High Court, while granting bail to
respondent no.2, did not consider any of the relevant factors for
grant of bail and did not advert to the actual facts of the case – In
fact, no reasoning is apparent from the order of High Court – Fact
that respondent no.2 was a habitual offender and nearly twenty
cases were registered against him was not even mentioned in the
order of High Court – Order of High Court was cryptic, and did
not suggest any application of mind, and, accordingly set aside –
Judgment / Order – Reasoned order.
Bail – Interference with – By Appellate forum – Scope – Held:
Once bail has been granted, the Appellate Court is usually slow to
interfere with the same as it pertains to the liberty of an individual.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.439 – Considerations
on basis of which discretion u/s.439, CrPC has to be exercised while
granting bail – Discussed – Held: Grant of bail requires the
consideration of various factors which ultimately depends upon
the specific facts and circumstances of the case – There is no strait
jacket formula – However, certain important factors that are always
considered, inter-alia, relate to prima facie involvement of the
accused, nature and gravity of the charge, severity of the
punishment, and the character, position and standing of the accused
– At the stage of granting bail, the Court is not required to enter
into a detailed analysis of the evidence in the case – Such an exercise
may be undertaken at the stage of trial – Bail.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.439 – Issue relating to
whether the High Court exercised discretionary power u/s.439 CrPC
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
28
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2022] 3 S.C.R.
in granting bail appropriately – Held: Such an assessment is
different from deciding whether circumstances subsequent to the
grant of bail made it necessary to cancel the same – The first situation
requires the Court to analyze whether the order granting bail was
illegal, perverse, unjustified or arbitrary – On the other hand, an
application for cancellation of bail looks at whether supervening
circumstances have occurred warranting cancellation – Bail –
Cancellation of bail.
Judgment / Order – Reasoned order – Necessity of – Held:
Reasoning is the life blood of the judicial system – An unreasoned
order suffers the vice of arbitrariness.
Bail – Recent trend of orders granting or refusing to grant
bail, where Courts make a general observation that “the facts and
the circumstances” have been considered and no specific reasons
are indicated which precipitated the passing of the order by the
Court – Such a practice has been disapproved in various judgments
of the Supreme Court – Judgment / Order – Reasoned order.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD:1. The grant of bail requires the consideration of
various factors which ultimately depends upon the specific facts
and circumstances of the case before the Court. There is no strait
jacket formula which can ever be prescribed as to what the
relevant factors could be. However, certain important factors that
are always considered, inter-alia, relate to prima facie involvement
of the accused, nature and gravity of the charge, severity of the
punishment, and the character, position and standing of the
accused. At the stage of granting bail the Court is not required to
enter into a detailed analysis of the evidence in the case. Such an
exercise may be undertaken at the stage of trial. Once bail has
been granted, the Appellate Court is usually slow to interfere
with the same as it pertains to the liberty of an individual.
[Paras 9, 10 and 11][33-B-D]
2.1. In the present case, a bare perusal of the impugned
order passed by the High Court does not suggest that the Court
has considered any of the relevant factors for grant of bail. Apart
from the general observation that the facts and circumstances of
the case have been taken into account, nowhere have the actual
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
29
facts of the case been adverted to. There appears to be no
reference to the factors that ultimately led the High Court to
grant bail. In fact, no reasoning is app

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.