GRANTS BAIL TO FIRST-TIME OFFENDER IN SC/ST ACT CASE, PROVIDES OPPORTUNITY TO COURSE-CORRECT
GRANTS BAIL TO FIRST-TIME OFFENDER IN SC/ST ACT CASE, PROVIDES OPPORTUNITY TO COURSE-CORRECT
Referring to the judgment of the Top Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v State of Punjab wherein it has been observed that the bail decision must enter the cumulative effect of the variety of circumstances justifying the grant or refusal of bail, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has allowed an appeal under section 14-A of Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 of the accused challenging the dismissal of his bail application.
Justice Anoop Chitkara opined that the appellant made a case for bail in the instant case.
The appellant had filed a bail application before the Additional Sessions Judge, which was dismissed on March 1, 2023. The allegations were of abusing the people belonging to the scheduled castes by using the derogatory words prohibited under the Scheduled Caste & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The Counsel for the appellant submitted that he would have no objection in case any stringent conditions this Court might put upon the appellant. The appellant’s contention was that the custodial investigation would serve no purpose whatsoever, and the pre-trial incarceration would cause an irreversible injustice to the appellant and family.
The State as well as counsel for the complainant opposed the bail.
After considering the submissions from both the sides, the Court noted that on prima facie analysis of the nature of allegations and other factors peculiar to this case, there would be no justifiability for custodial or pretrial incarceration at this stage.
Furthermore, the appellant was a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct.
The Bench referred to the judgment of the Supreme Court in Dataram Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh, wherein it was held that the grant or refusal of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously, compassionately, and in a humane manner. Also, conditions for the grant of bail ought not to be so strict as to be incapable of compliance, thereby making the grant of bail illusory.
In view of the above, the Court without commenting on the case's merits and in the facts and circumstances peculiar to this case, observed that the appellant made a case for bail, subject to certain terms and conditions, which shall be over and above and irrespective of the contents of the form of bail bonds in chapter XXXIII of CrPC, 1973.Hence, the appeal was accordingly allowed.
CASES TITLE: DINESH VS STATE OF HARYANA
CRA-S-763-2023-PUNJ HC- P&H
Justice Anoop Chitkara [20-03-2023]