No Condition For Automatic Cancellation Of Bail Can Be Imposed While Granting Bail: Punjab & Haryana HC
The Punjab and Haryana High Court reiterated that no condition for automatic cancellation of bail can be imposed while granting bail.
The Court was deciding a petition under Section 483 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) seeking to set aside the condition/observation i.e., “in case, the applicant is involved in any other case of similar nature, the bail granted, in the case in hand shall deemed to be dismissed without further notice” imposed vide an order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge while granting bail.
A Single Bench of Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi held, “A perusal of the judgments referred to hereinabove would show that no condition for the automatic cancellation of bail can be imposed while granting bail. The only condition that can be imposed is that the Investigating Agency/complainant would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail which would be adjudicated upon in accordance with law. In fact, bail once granted cannot be cancelled automatically and in a mechanical manner. There must be cogent and overwhelming circumstances necessary to cancel the bail once granted.”
The Bench observed that mere violation of the bail conditions would not be sufficient to cancel the bail and that the court must be satisfied that it is necessary to cancel the same, keeping in view the various factors.
Advocate Kunal Dawar appeared on behalf of the petitioner while DAG Rajiv Goel appeared on behalf of the respondent.
Facts of the Case -
An FIR under Section 20 of the NDPS (Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances) Act, 1985 was registered against the petitioner/accused with the allegations that 1 kg 534 gm of Ganja was recovered from her. She sought the concession bail which was granted by the Trial Court vide an order with the aforesaid observation. Thereafter, an FIR under Sections 20, 61, and 85 was registered against another person from whom the recovery of 3 kgs 770 gm of Ganja was effected and the name of the petitioner surfaced in the disclosure statement of that person.
That person was granted bail and the petitioner was arrested. Similarly, her name appeared in the disclosure statement of one more accused but he was also granted bail. Thereafter, an application was moved by the prosecution for cancellation of bail granted on the grounds that the petitioner was found to have been involved in other FIRs. Based on the respective pleadings of both parties, the regular bail granted to her was cancelled on the ground that there was a condition for automatic cancellation of bail in the order. Hence, such a condition was under the challenge before the High Court.
The High Court in the above regard noted, “Coming back to the facts of the instant case, when the petitioner was granted the concession of bail, a condition was imposed that his bail would be deemed to be dismissed in case he was found to be involved in cases of a similar nature in future. It was in pursuance to the said order, that the impugned order 21.10.2022 (Annexure P-8) has been passed cancelling the bail granted to the petitioner.”
The Court said that in the instant case, however, the bail has been cancelled automatically without examining any circumstances whatsoever one of which would have been that in the two other cases registered against the petitioner, she had been granted the concession of bail prior to her bail being cancelled in the instant case.
“… the observation made in the order dated 12.10.2020 (Annexure P-3) which reads as “It is made clear that in case, the applicant is involved in any other case of similar nature, the bail granted, in the case in hand shall deemed to be dismissed without further notice.” would be substituted with the following observations as “it is made clear that in case the applicant is involved in any other case of similar nature, the prosecution/Investigating Agency shall be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail before the appropriate Court which shall be adjudicated upon in accordance with law”, ordered the Court.
Accordingly, the High Court clarified that the prosecution/Investigating Agency would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail, if so advised and the same shall be adjudicated upon by the concerned court in accordance with law.
Cause Title- Rajiya v. State of Haryana (Neutral Citation: 2023:PHHC:164447)
