LI Network
Published on: December 05, 2023 at 12:20 IST
The Supreme Court, during the hearing of an appeal challenging the Jharkhand High Court’s decision to grant bail to an individual accused of attempted murder, emphasized that simply claiming innocence or expressing readiness to partake in the trial does not constitute valid reasons for granting bail in serious offenses.
The Court explicitly stated, “At any rate, mere claim of innocence or undertaking to participate in the trial or contention of absence of specific allegation of any overt act cannot, in such circumstances, be assigned as reasons for grant of bail in a case of serious nature.”
The Division-Judge Bench, comprising Justices C.T. Ravikumar and PV Sanjay Kumar, presided over the matter. The accused faced charges under various sections of the IPC, including Section 307 (Punishments for Attempt to Murder), and Section 27 of the Arms Act (Punishment for using arms). Despite being arrested on August 28, 2022, the accused was granted bail by the High Court on January 12, 2023.
Before the High Court, the accused maintained innocence and committed to participating in the trial. It was argued that no overt act had been specifically alleged against the accused, and the investigation into the case had concluded. Based on these submissions, the High Court ordered the release of the accused on bail.
However, the Supreme Court expressed dissatisfaction with this decision, asserting that completion of the investigation alone cannot be a valid ground for granting bail in cases involving attempted murder.
“When the offenses alleged, inter alia, include one under Section 307, IPC, and the accused concerned is so arraigned with the aid of Section 149, IPC, such submissions, reflected in the paragraph or the mere factum of completion of investigation by itself, cannot be the reason(s) for grant of bail without due consideration of the relevant aspects.”
Consequently, the Supreme Court set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the High Court, directing a fresh consideration in accordance with the law.
CASE TITLE: THE STATE OF JHARKHAND v. DHANANJAY GUPTA @ DHANANJAY PRASAD GUPTA