Concept of Successive Bail Application

Introduction:

The term “bail” is a security given by the charged that he will show up some time recently the court for replying the allegations that have been made against him and incorporate individual bonds and safeguard bonds. An arrested individual is trusted to his sureties upon their security that the said individual would show up at the assigned put and time, to the jurisdiction of the court. The sureties to whom the captured individual is conveyed ended up the bailer as they are responsible for his presence when required. An individual is safeguarded on the bond given by the sureties and the surety must have a specialist to safeguard the arrested individual.

Keywords: Bailable offence, Non-bailable offence, Successive bail application, adequate sureties, interface of equity, Discharge from custody, sufficient sureties.

Classification

There are two types of offences under Section 2(a) of CrPC: Bailable and Non-bailable:

1. Bailable offence: According to Section 2(a), an offence which is appeared within the First Schedule of CrPC as bailable, or which is made bailable by any other law in drive would be a bailable offence. First Schedule consists of two parts: the primary portion relates to offences under the Indian Penal Code and the second portion deals with offences under other laws. The moment portion says that offences that are culpable for less than three a long time or with fine as it were are bailable offences. A few illustrations of it would be bribery or open disturbance etc. In this sort of offence, bail can be claimed as a matter of right, as they are less serious.
2. Non-bailable offence: According to Section 2(a), any offence which isn’t included within the First Schedule as a bailable offence is a non-bailable offence. The offences guilty of death, life imprisonment or incarceration for more than seven years are classified as crimes under the second section of the First Schedule. In this sort of offence, an individual cannot be bailed as a matter of right but can ask the court to allow bail. The discretion is vested with the court to give bail or not, subject to the conditions specified in Section 437.

Bail

Bail is a kind of assurance provided to the court by the accused that he will cooperate in the trials against the allegations against him, including collateral protection and bail protection. The term bail is not specified under CRPC, but the terms “refundable offence” and “non-refundable offence” are specified (Section 2a). “Bail” has been described in the Law Lexicon as protection for the convicted person’s appearance on providing that is released pending trial or enquiry. Bail is perceived to be a process by which the State imposes on the society the purpose of protecting the safety of the inmates and at the same time includes community participation in the administration of justice.

Provisions of Bail Application

Related provisions of bail under criminal procedure code:

1. Section 436: If the police authority arrests a person who is not guilty of any non-bailable crime and is willing to grant bail without a warrant, so it is the responsibility of the police authorities to free him. The accused person could be released on the bond without providing any guarantees.
2. Section 439: Section 439of the code deals with appealability of the order. Section 439 of the code specifies that all directives made pursuant to section 436 of the code are to be challenged. The decision rendered to the judge of the court by the magistrate shall be appealable. In case the session court sends an order to the court where an appeal is based on an order made by such court.
3. Section 167: Section 57 of the code specifies that after 24 hours, a person who has been detained or taken into custody must be released. He has to be issued with a notice before the magistrate within those 24 hours. If the investigation into the felony or crime committed has not been concluded, the 24-hour duration can be extended. Section 167 specifies that direct approval must be received from the magistrate in order to prolong the span of 24 hours for the benefit of the inquiry. If the investigation is not over the arrested or imprisoned person shall be released. The detention period shall not exceed 90 days and 60 days.
4. Section 436 A: Under section 436 A of the Code, if the offender has been imprisoned for one-half of the prescribed penalty for the crime committed by him, the incarceration term for an on-trial inmate other than the one convicted of the criminal offences punishable by death or life imprisonment shall be extended.
5. Section 437: It relies on the court’s or police officials’ discretion that they can release the person detained for non-bailable offences unless and until there are fairgrounds or apprehensions that the person arrested has committed some felony and is not guilty of any criminal liability punished by life imprisonment or death.
6. Section 437A: Under section 437A of the code, it has been stated that in order to appear in the higher court as and when the higher court issues the notice against the judgment of the court it becomes mandatory for the trial court or the appellate court which requires the accused to execute the bail bond with sureties. 

Conditions to Grant to Bail

Under Section 437(3), certain conditions are imposed by the court whereas allowing bail where the charged is punished with imprisonment of more than seven years, or abetment, conspiracy, or endeavour to commit any such offence:

1. That such individual shall act, according to the conditions of the bond.
2. That such an individual might not commit an offence comparative to the one he is charged off.
3. That such individual might initiate any other individual to not disclose the realities with respect to the case, or alter with the evidence. Other conditions may moreover be imposed within the interface of equity.
4. Provisions pursuant to Section 437, section 3 may be imposed as if the bail had been issued under that provision.

Successive Bail Application

Provisions are well known that an accused has the right to make successive bail applications, but in the modified conditions successive bail applications are fair. It must be significant to adjust the conditions that have a concerted impact on the prior option and not just superficial modifications that have little to no consequence. Without the change in the conditions, the consequent bail appeal will be deemed to be seeking an audit of the previous order of refusal which is not acceptable under criminal law. When accepting such substantive bail applications, the Court has a responsibility to consider the reasons and grounds for which the earlier bail applications have been refused and what are the fresh grounds that affect it once again to support the determination and evaluation of the bail application and to include a view that is distinct from that held in the previous applications.

Is Successive Bail Application Maintainable?

Successive bail is maintainable as an individual has the right to create new bail applications nor render a previous bail under the modified conditions apps are allowed. The change of circumstances must be significant a clear and not merely superficial effect on the earlier decision changes which have a little or slight effect. In the changing conditions, further filing for bail will be regarded as pursuing revision of the earlier refusal order which is not permitted under criminal law. Because when exciting those subsequent bail applications, the Court has a duty to consider the reasons and grounds on which the earlier bail applications were dismissed and what are the fresh grounds that allow it to explain anew the determination and evaluation of the bail application, and to take a different view from the one held in the earlier applications.

Provisions Regarding Bond of Accused and Sureties

• Amount of Bond and Reduction

Under Section 440, after proper consideration of the circumstances of the case, the amount of each bail bond executed under this chapter should be determined and the bond should not in any way, be unreasonable. The High Court or Court of Session also has the authority to arrange the bail issued by a police officer or a magistrate to be cut down.

• Condition and Execution of Bonds

Section 441 deals with the provision relating to the condition and execution of a bail bond. Before discharging an individual on bail or on his possess bond, a bond must be executed by that individual, and such bond should be agreeing to the police officer or court, as they think fit. Also, in the event that the individual is discharged on bail where a bond has been given by one or more adequate sureties, it must be made sure by the sureties that such individual shall attend according to the time and place specified in the bond and might continue unless something else inquired by a police officer or the court. If any other condition is to be forced for the discharge of the individual, such condition shall also be there within the bond. Such a bond may too require the discharged individual to seem some time recently the High Court, Court of Session or other courts for replying the charge. For checking that the sureties are fit, the court may require them to record the affirmations for such wellness and adequacy, and may too arrange a request itself or by the officer to check their wellness or adequacy.

• Declaration of Bond

As per Section 441A, each individual acting as surety for the charged must pronounce before the court the number of people to whom he has stood as security including the charged and should provide therein all the significant particulars.

• Discharge from Custody

Section 442 deals with release from custody. It says that as soon as a bond is executed for the discharge of the individual, such individual might be discharged, and on the off chance that he is in imprison, at that point the court in which the bond was executed should coordinate the police officer of that imprison to discharge the individual, and the police officer may do so on getting the receipt of that to arrange.

• Sufficiency of Sureties and Discharge of Sureties

According to Section 443, if a person serving as a defence is inadequate or is consequently determined to be ineffective, then the court may issue a warrant for the arrest of the accused person and order that person to be given adequate defence, and if he fails to do so, the court may sentence him to prison.

Section 444 deals with promise release. It says that any of the promises or joint guarantees can, at any time, appeal to a Magistrate for the presence or attendance of a person to discharge their bond solely or in relation to the claimant.

Upon such proposal, the Magistrate shall appoint such a person to be arrested and brought before the court, and shall direct the bond to be disposed on the man’s appearance in so much as it relates to the claimant, and shall ask the applicant to find further sufficient security or security and, if he fails to do so, may impose him in prison.

• Bond in Case of Minor

Section 448 speaks about the bond a minor deserves. Where the person to be freed is a minor, the bond can only be enforced by probation or security. A minor cannot himself have a warrant imposed for his freedom.

Landmark Judgments

• Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar[1]

A petition of habeas corpus was recorded with respect to the administration of jails within the State of Bihar. It was found that a huge number of detainees counting men, ladies, and children were put behind bars for a long time, anticipating their trial. Numerous of those detainees had committed offences, for which they would have been given punishment not more than some months or in a few cases, two years, but they were behind imprisoned for three to ten a long time which as well without any trial.

Here the court needed the prompt discharge of those detainees. Court said that fairness under Article 21 is impeded where an individual isn’t given a fast trial, where an individual is not given pre-trial ought to be discharged on bail on an individual bond, where the individual charged is poor and there are no chances of him to steal away, where an individual has been kept under trial for a time more prominent than the discipline he would have been granted, where he isn’t given free legitimate help, and where he is as well destitute to engage a lawyer, provided that the attorney given by the state isn’t protested by him. Court inquired to require the taking after components for ascertaining his roots within the community: His length of home within the community. His work status, history, and money related condition. His family ties and notoriety within the community. His earlier criminal record. The nature of the offence committed the clear likelihood of conviction and the likely sentence.

• Moti Ram v. State of Madhya Pradesh[2]

In this case, a destitute mason was convicted. The apex court alluded the matter to Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) to discharge him on bail, without making any details as to sureties, bonds etc.

The CJM settled Rs.10, 000 as surety and bond and along these lines denied to permit his brother to become surety as his property was within the adjoining town. The applicant challenged it to the apex court. Justice Krishna Iyer criticized the activities of the judge and said that the courts ought to be slanted to bail, not imprison. The court said that the charged cannot be inquired to outfit surety from the same district where the offence is being attempted. Court encourage emphasized that bail can be given on individual bonds, as well as on sureties bond; the court shall too be beyond any doubt the condition of the individual whereas settling the sum of the bond. And where a poor individual is included, the court ought to be liberal in discharging them within the individual recognizance.

• M/s Gati Limited v. T. Nagarajan Piramiajee & Another

In a fresh and most recent improvement, the Supreme Court on May 6, 2019, has in a latest, landmark and praiseworthy judgment titled M/s Gati Constrained v. T. Nagarajan Piramiajee & Another, In Criminal Offer No. 870 of 2019 [Emerging out of SLP (Cri.) No. 6677 of 2018] emphasized because it has a few times within the past that successive bail applications recorded by an accused ought to be set before the same Judge who had denied bail within the first instance unless that Judge is not accessible. If that Judge isn’t accessible who had refused bail at the primary instance then it can be set sometime recently a few distinctive Judge. Both the prosecutors conjointly all the Judges must continuously keep this key point in intellect on such cases. There can be no denying or debating it.

This vital, most recent and praiseworthy decision makes it perfectly clear that successive bail applications should be put before the same judge who found the first. Numerous case laws were cited in this striking judgment to support this consistent point of view which has already been considered in comprehensive detail in the above para. It is only when the Judge either leaves or is exchanged or isn’t accessible for a few other reasons that the bail application can be set before a few other Judge. All courts and all Judges must continuously strictly follow to what has been laid down in this point of interest stated by the Supreme Court so explicitly and so elegantly.

Conclusion

It is clear that the main intention of providing bail is not to free a prisoner but to make sure the person remains for the trial. Often the rule is implemented to restrict a person’s personal rights and to ensure that no false lawsuit is made. That’s not an inherent right, though, but subject to different restrictions.

---

References:

• www.legalservicesindia.com
• www.manupatra.com
• www.researchgate.com
• www.westlawindia.com
• www.lawjournalindia.com
• https://www.lawyersnjurists.com/article/general-study-bail-crpc-laws/
• https://lawtimesjournal.in/anticipatory-bail/
• https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/The-basic-rules-for-grant-or-denial-of-bail-under-CrPC-8996.asp.
• https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/supreme-court-grants-bail-to-chidambaram-in-inx-media-case/articleshow/72359875.cms

[1] 1979 AIR 1369

[2] 1978 AIR 1594