The Kerala High Court has ruled that lower courts, while granting or refusing bail, must state briefly the reasons to support their decision. Justice B. Sudheendra Kumar observed recently that it was mandatory that courts record the facts in brief, including the date of arrest/surrender of the accused and also the rank of the accused, if there were more than one accused in a crime.
Common practice
The court, while disposing of a bail petition, pointed out that it was common that many magistrate courts while dealing with the bail applications under Section 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code failed to mention the facts in brief.
Section 437(4) of the Cr. P.C. mandates that an officer or a court, while releasing any person on bail under sub section (1) or (2) of 437, shall record in writing the reasons or special reasons for doing so.
Supreme Court ruling
The Supreme Court also had held that courts were required to indicate the reasons for grant or refusal of bail to an accused.
The court added that giving reasons was different from discussing the merits or demerits of the application. At the stage of granting bail, a detailed examination of all the materials and elaborate documentation of merits of the case should not be undertaken.
Prima facie conclusion
However, while granting or refusing the bail, reasons for prima facie conclusion as to why the bail was granted or refused must be indicated in the order.
The court said that the reasons were always based on the facts of the case.
Therefore, without mentioning the facts, no reasons could be recorded.
This would mean that the reasons were interlinked with the facts of the case.
The facts inter alia included the date of arrest/surrender of the accused and the rank of the accused.
Kerala High Court recently said it was mandatory for courts to record facts in brief
Source: The Hindu
No comments:
Post a Comment