8 July 2022

The Delhi High Court is concerned about the “disturbing trend” of lower courts hearing bail requests that are now before the high court.

On Monday, the Delhi High Court voiced worry about the “disturbing trend” of lower courts granting bail requests even when they are still pending before the High Courts.

All trial courts instructed by Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta to ask the parties if any comparable processes in the same case were ongoing at higher forums. The court additionally instructed parties to report if prior bail petitions had been denied.

The court concluded that; these procedures will prevent forum shopping and guarantee that; the notion of judicial propriety and discipline is respected. A petition filed by; an accused person appealing the decision of the Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) at; Tis Hazari Courts to deny his bail plea being heard by; Justice Mendiratta.

According to Justice Mendiratta, inferior courts must respect the hierarchy of courts and adhere to judicial discipline and appropriateness. He said that; applications for bail submitted by the accused but denied by; higher courts should still be given serious attention. The court noted that; while an accused person whose bail application denied by; the court is not prohibited from submitting additional bail requests, a new bail application can only be submitted in; the event of a change in circumstances. Therefore, if a later application is granted; the court must record new justifications for its decision that; differ from those made in the earlier petitions submitted on the accused’s behalf.

“As a result, judicial wisdom predicts that;  in order to prevent any injustice, the involved court has a responsibility to inquire about any outstanding bail applications with; higher courts, if any, or to reject any bail applications made by lower courts. Consideration of a bail application by; lower courts while an application is pending before a higher court, or without due consideration of the; reasons for a rejection or an earlier application by; a higher court, may constitute a flagrant violation of judicial discipline “The court noted in its ruling.

Background

The accused  charged with trespassing in the complainant’s home when she away while they traveling to Gujarat for COVID-19 in June 2020. After being found guilty of falsifying the property paperwork for the house and being charged by; the police, the accused detained in September 2021.

The prosecution additionally said that; the Additional Chief Metropolitan Judge and the Additional Sessions Judge both rejected;  the accused’s bail requests while he or she detained, once before and once after the charge sheet filed. Both bail requests turned down.

The defendants then went to the Delhi High Court to appeal the court’s denial of bail.

Read more blogs@advocatetanwar.com

Disclaimer

The following disclaimer governs the use of this website (“Website”) and the services provided by the Law offices of Kr. Vivek Tanwar Advocate & Associates in accordance with the laws of India. By accessing or using this Website, you acknowledge and agree to the terms and conditions stated in this disclaimer.

The information provided on this Website is for general informational purposes only and should not be considered as legal advice or relied upon as such. The content of this Website is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between you and the Law Firm. Any reliance on the information provided on this Website is done at your own risk.

The Law Firm makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, regarding the accuracy, completeness, reliability, or suitability of the information contained on this Website.

The Law Firm disclaims all liability for any errors or omissions in the content of this Website or for any actions taken in reliance on the information provided herein. The information contained in this website, should not be construed as an act of solicitation of work or advertisement in any manner.