Blog Details

“Liberty is one of the most essential requirements of the modern man. It is said to be the delicate fruit of a mature civilization. It is the very quintessence of civilized existence and essential requirement of a modern man”:  John E.E.D.

According to the precedent laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the catena of its judgements “Bail remains the rule and Jail is the Exception”, has been often currently misused and misplaced by the state authorities. The premise is based upon the statistics report taken under cognizance by the Supreme Court which shows that “ Jails in India are overflowing with inmates with undertrial detainees making up more than 2/3 of prison inmates. Most of the convicts in this category may not even be required to be arrested despite having registered a cognizable offence and being accused of crimes carrying a seven-year maximum sentence or less. Not only this category includes the underprivileged and ignorant, but also women. Additionally, statistics indicate that more than 1000 children are housed in jails with their mothers. Bail in these situations is in the best interests of everyone involved, including the children who shouldn't be exposed to jail life”.

With these statistics at hand, the Apex court recently had called for a new legislation on “bails” to prevent such unnecessary arrest. The decision to draft bail laws altogether is to streamline the grant of bail.

In the wordings of the Supreme Court: 

Unlawful arrests are made in contravention of Section 41 (CrPC) which gives police the right to make an arrest without a warrant and Section 41A (CrPC) which governs the process for appearing before police. The Supreme Court noted that arrest is a "draconian" tactic that should be used "sparingly". As the cornerstone of Article 21, it was upheld that bail remained the rule and jail the exception and emphasised upon the assumption of innocence until proven guilty.

No Proper functioning of Bail System:

Due to the absence of a bail law, magistrate decisions are not consistently made. Currently, judges can issue anyone bail at their exclusive discretion. There should be written regulations and laws enacted by Parliament that would limit the discretion, but there are none at the moment. The revised proposals merely state that while granting bail, no police officer or judge should have discretion over a person's liberty.

Even the amount of the bail bond is up to the judge's discretion, and because some defendants cannot afford the sum, judges are reluctant to release them on bail for fear that they would flee the country. The bench hearing the case determines the likelihood of bail. One judge may be more pro-bail, whereas another judge may not be. Some people might approach criminal law harshly. In the end, it comes down to personal judgement.

Guidelines Suggested by the Supreme Court:

1. The Supreme Court of India observed that some pre-independence-era laws still exist in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), with a focus on "unwarranted arrests" that restrict people's freedom.
2. In order to shorten the bail process, the Court encouraged the Center to draft legislation in the form of a "Bail Act," emphasising the necessity to establish proper procedure for arrests and a deadline for handling bail petitions.
3. The Court ruled that bail applications must be resolved within two weeks, unless specific circumstances require otherwise. The anticipatory bail must be heard and disposed off within six weeks.
4. The Court ruled that when contemplating a plea under Sections 88, 170, 204, and 209 of the CrPC, there was no requirement to enter a bail plea.
5. This will greatly improve the chances of an accused receiving bail because courts typically tend to remand accused individuals upon production by the police or upon their appearance before them in response to a summons or a warrant, and only consider bail upon the filing of an application by the accused.
6. With this guideline in place, the accused may occasionally have bail granted at the court's discretion. For instance, if a defendant is present in court and must appear in the same or a different court later, the judge may accept a bail (under Section 88) rather than remanding the defendant in custody.
7. In accordance with Section 170, bail may also be granted when a police officer produces the accused or when the court issues a summons to appear in response to a complaint or a warrant to appear after the police file a charge sheet, or when a magistrate refers a matter to a sessions court for trial (Sec. 209).

Conclusion:

The Bail Act's primary goal is to decrease the overall population of prisoners in prisons. India's prisons are incredibly overcrowded. The Bail Act is an essential statute that prevents overcrowding of jails with unjustified arrests. Around 15 Indian states have 100% occupancy rates, while Uttar Pradesh has a rate of 117%, according to the Prison Statistics of India Report, 2020.

Refrences:

1.https://www.indiatoday.in/law/story/why-supreme-court-put-emphasis-on-separate-bail-law-1979246-2022-07-24

2. https://www.scconline.com/blog/post/2022/07/24/supreme-court-asks-centre-to-enact-bail-act-layes-down-guidelines-for-disposal-of-bail-applications-legal-news-updates-research-criminal-law/

3.https://www.india.com/explainer/explained-why-is-supreme-court-stressing-on-a-separate-bail-law-5520390/

4.https://www.factchecker.in/explained/explained-why-supreme-court-calls-for-a-separate-bail-law-826657

5. https://scroll.in/article/1028189/judiciary-is-asking-for-a-new-bail-law-but-wouldnt-implementing-existing-rules-do-the-job-anyway