The Supreme Court has reiterated that bail applications for serious offences like murder, rape, and dacoity should not be routinely entertained by the Trial Courts or High Courts once the trial begins. The bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice R Mahadevan emphasized that the Court should avoid granting bail during the trial, except in cases where the trial is unduly delayed due to no fault of the accused, infringing on their right to a speedy trial.
In a recent appeal concerning a rape case, the Court disapproved of the High Court’s decision to grant bail to an accused, citing minor discrepancies in the FIR and the victim’s Section 164 CrPC statement. The Supreme Court observed that granting bail based on such discrepancies was improper, especially when the victim had not yet been cross-examined in court. The Court also criticized the common practice of granting bail after the charge is framed or after the victim’s testimony is recorded, as it may affect the trial’s integrity.
While the Court refrained from disturbing the High Court’s bail order, it imposed additional conditions on the accused, including a ban on entering the victim’s village until the trial concludes and an obligation to provide his new residential address to the police. The Court also directed the Trial Court to prioritize the case and complete the trial within three months.
Case Title: X v. State of Rajasthan
This ruling underscores the importance of allowing trials in serious offences to proceed to their conclusion without premature bail decisions, while also safeguarding the accused’s right to a speedy trial.
Lawcutor 