SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM versus CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

Citation: [2019] 13 S.C.R. 985 · Decided: 22-10-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: R. BANUMATHI · Disposal: Disposed off

cites 4 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
985
SHRI P. CHIDAMBARAM
v.
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
(Criminal Appeal No. 1603 of 2019)
OCTOBER 22, 2019
[R. BANUMATHI, A. S. BOPANNA AND
HRISHIKESH ROY, JJ.]
Bail:
Grant or refusal of – Case registered by CBI against
appellant–member of parliament and Senior member, u/s. 120B rw
s. 420 IPC, ss. 8, 13(2) rw s. 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption
Act, 1988 – Arrest of the appellant and since then appellant in
custody – Bail application – High Court declined regular bail to
appellant – On appeal, held: Appellant is not a “flight risk” and in
view of the conditions imposed, there is no possibility of his
abscondence from the trial – Statement of the prosecution that the
appellant has influenced the witnesses and there is likelihood of
his further influencing the witnesses cannot be the ground to deny
bail to the appellant particularly, when there is no such indication
in the remand applications filed by the prosecution – Charge sheet
has been filed against the appellant and other co-accused –
Appellant is in custody for about two months whereas co-accused
were already granted bail – Appellant is said to be aged 74 years
and is also said to be suffering from age related health problems –
In view thereof, the appellant entitled to be granted bail.
Grant or refusal of – Factors to be considered – Stated.
Judgment/order: Order granting or refusing bail – Reasoned
order – Necessity of – Held: Recording of reasons is necessary
since the accused/prosecution/victim has every right to know the
reasons for grant or refusal to grant bail – It would help the
appellate court to appreciate and consider the reasonings for grant
or refusal of bail – At the stage of granting bail, an elaborate
examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching upon the
merit of the case, should be avoided.
 [2019] 13 S.C.R. 985
985
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
986
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 13 S.C.R.
Allowing the Criminal Appeal No. 1603/19 and dismissing
Criminal Appeal No. 1605/19, the Court
HELD: 1.1 Expression of prima facie reasons for granting
or refusing to grant bail is a requirement of law especially where
such bail orders are appealable so as to indicate application of
mind to the matter under consideration and the reasons for
conclusion. Recording of reasons is necessary since the accused/
prosecution/victim has every right to know the reasons for grant
or refusal to grant bail. This will also help the appellate court to
appreciate and consider the reasonings for grant or refusal to
grant bail. But giving reasons for exercise of discretion in granting
or refusing to grant bail is different from discussing the merits or
demerits of the case. At the stage of granting bail, an elaborate
examination of evidence and detailed reasons touching upon the
merit of the case, which may prejudice the accused, should be
avoided. Observing that at the stage of granting bail, detailed
examination of evidence and elaborate documentation of the
merits of the case should be avoided. [Para 17][997-G-H; 998-A-
B]
1.2 The jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the
basis of the well–settled principles having regard to the facts and
circumstances of each case. The following factors are to be taken
into consideration while considering an application for bail:– the
nature of accusation and the severity of the punishment in the
case of conviction and the nature of the materials relied upon by
the prosecution; reasonable apprehension of tampering with the
witnesses or apprehension of threat to the complainant or the
witnesses; reasonable possibility of securing the presence of the
accused at the time of trial or the likelihood of his abscondence;
character behaviour and standing of the accused and the
circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; larger interest
of the public or the State and similar other considerations. There
is no hard and fast rule regarding grant or refusal to grant bail.
Each case has to be considered on the facts and circumstances of
each case and on its own merits.  The discretion of the court has
to be exercised judiciously and not in an arbitrary manner. It
cannot be said that “flight risk” of economic offenders should be
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
987
looked at as a national phenomenon and be dealt with in that
manner merely because certain other offenders have flown out
of the country. The same cannot be put in a straight–jacket formula
so as to deny bail to the one who is before the Court, due to the
conduct of other o

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