Introduction: Bail laws play a crucial role in the criminal justice system, serving as a mechanism to secure an accused appearance in court while awaiting trial. The concept of bail has been a fundamental aspect of legal systems worldwide for centuries, balancing the principles of justice, individual rights, and public safety. Over time, societies have grappled with refining these laws to strike the right balance between preserving personal liberties and ensuring public order. It is pertinent to note here that Supreme Court came up with the principle of Bail is the rule, and jail is an exception in the landmark case of State of Rajasthan V BalchandBaliyan (1977) 4 SCC 308 which advocated that any accused shall only be denied bail in only exceptional circumstances. The concept of bail becomes more relevant when we observe the recent statistics dealing with under-trial prisoners in our country. According to data made public by the National Crime Records Bureau (NCRB), more than three-fourths of prisoners in India’s jails are under trial. In 2021, 427,165 prisoners—or 77%—of the total 554,034 prisoners—were under trial. This was an increase of 14.9% from the 371,848 under-trials in prison in 2020.
In recent years, bail laws have experienced significant developments, sparked by concerns about fairness, effectiveness, and the need to address issues of overcrowding in Under trial prisoners. These developments have been driven by evolving legal standards, societal attitudes, and the recognition of potential biases within the existing system.Bail can be defined as the temporary release of the person accused of any offense on certain conditions imposed on him by the Hon’ble courts.
Types of Bails Under the Criminal Procedure Code:
Under the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) in India, there are various kinds of bail that can be granted to an accused person. The specific type of bail depends on the nature of the offense, the severity of the crime, and the discretion of the court. Here are the main kinds of bail available under the CrPC;
• Regular Bail: Regular bail is the most common type of bail in which an accused person is released on bail pending trial or investigation. It is granted to a person who is under arrest or in custody, and the court may impose certain conditions or sureties to ensure the accused’s appearance during the trial.
• Anticipatory Bail: Anticipatory bailu/s 438 of CrPc is sought in anticipation of arrest. If there is a reasonable belief that a person may be arrested for a non-bailable offense, they can apply for anticipatory bail. If the court grants anticipatory bail, the person will be protected from arrest for a specified period, and they must cooperate with the investigation as required.
State v. Jagan Singh 1953 CriLJ 74 The Madhya Pradesh High Court acknowledged the idea of anticipatory bail for a person who surrenders before the court out of dread of being arrested for a crime that is punishable by law.
Balachand v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1977 SC 366 in present caseThe Supreme Court established the prerequisites and restrictions for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
In Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab (1980)2 SCC 565, the Supreme Court determined that anticipatory bail is a common remedy that should be applied liberally to safeguard the accused’s personal freedom.
• Interim Bail: Interim bail is a temporary bail granted during the pendency of an application for regular bail or anticipatory bail. It is usually given when the main bail application is still under consideration, and the court deems it necessary to grant temporary relief to the accused. It is further important to mention here that Interim bail is nowhere defined in the code, the apex court came up with the concept in the landmark Judgement ofLal KamlendraPratap Singh V State of UP. and Ors. 2009 (3) ADJ 322 (SC) states that interim bail be granted pending disposal of bail application because arrest and detention of a person may cause irreparable loss.
• Default Bail:Under Section 167(2) of the CrPc, if the investigation is not completed within the stipulated period (normally 60 or 90 days, depending on the offense), the accused person is entitled to default bail as a matter of right. This means the accused can seek release on bail if the investigating agency fails to file the charge sheet within the specified time frame.
Ravi Prakash Singh vs. State of Bihar 2015 8 Supreme Court cases 340the apex courtheld that the 60 or 90-day period should be calculated starting from the day of the first remand following the arrest rather than the day of the arrest and that the day the charge sheet was filed should also be included. When calculating the 90-day term in Ravi’s case, where the accused turned himself into the magistrate and was remanded to judicial custody the same day, the dates of the surrender and remand were removed and the date the charge sheet was filed was included.
Mohd Iqbal V State of Maharashtra 1996 SCC (Cri) 202The Supreme Court condemned the practice of some courts of delaying default bail applications for a few days, which allowed the IO to file a charge sheet in the interim and undermine the accused’s legal right.
SADHWI PRAGYA SINGH THAKUR VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA THROUGH ANTI TERRORIST SQUAD (ATS) LNIND 2010 BOM 221The court denied the applicant’s request for bail under Sections 21(2)(b) and 167(2) of the Code because they were involved in a bombing. Whether the applicant is eligible for bail due to their arrest and wrongful detention Held, the accused cannot request bail under Section 439 of the Code unless the offense was proven while the accused was in custody. According to Section 439, the applicant’s request for bail was properly denied by the trial court because she failed to comply with Section 160. Additionally, because she voluntarily attended the Anti-Terrorist Squad Office, the applicant was not eligible to have her bail increased. Therefore, the application was dismissed.
Rakesh Kumar Paul vs. the State of Assam (2017) 15 SCC 67with a 2:1 Majority, the Supreme Court’s three-judge bench decided that offenses with a minimum sentence of less than ten years in prison are exempt from the 90-day window for applying for default bail. Therefore, the minimum length of detention for obtaining default bail shall be 60 days for crimes with minimum sentences of less than 10 years and maximum sentences of not life in prison or death.
Recent Developments:
The apex court while deciding the cases regarding bail gave some quintessential judgments in recent times, some of the cases are given as discussed here as under;
TeestaAtulSetalvad2023 SCC online SC 75In the present case the Apex court of 3 judges bench comprising of justice BR gavai, AS Bopana and DipankarDattagranted bail to a Human Rights activist and observed that the accused not filling an application for quashing of FIR/ Charge sheet under u/s 482 is not a relevant consideration for deciding any bail application. The Gujrat HC previously rejected the bail application on the aforesaid basis, further HC court observed not filling application u/s 482 presents the assumption of guilt of the accused. Section 482 provides the inherent power of any High Court which prevents the abuse of the process of any court while the justice dispensation.
The apex court further observed that no such procedure is provided in the court that advocates that an accused must file an application u/s 482 before bail application. It was held that such a prerequisiteresulted ina violation of the Right to life guaranteed under Article 21. While granting bail to any accused the factors that shall be considered are; Prima facie case, the possibility of the accused tampering with the evidence or influencing the witness, and the possibility of the accused feeling away from the hands of justice.
Frank Vitus V. Narcotics Control Bureau Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 6339- 6340/2023In the present case the apex court decided to consider whether the condition imposed by the Delhi HC on an accused requiring him to provide his Google Location from his mobile phone to the Investigating officer concerned throughout the period of his bail violates the Right to Life under Article 21.
During the hearing, Justice Abhay remarked that such condition shall amount to Surveillance on the accused. Further, the Apex Court requested Mr. Vinay Navre to assist the court in the present matter as an amicus curie.
PratibhaManchanada V State of Haryana Criminal Appeal No 1793 of 2023 in the present case the Apex Court observed that while dealing with anticipatory bail applications courts shall consider the gravity of the offense and its impact on the society with a free and fair investigation, the court shall strike a balance between the personal liberty and injustice to the victims. The accused was granted Anticipatory bail by the Punjab HC in serious offenses i.e. Section 406,420,467, 468 IPC.
The court further observed land scam by the accused resulted not only in financial losses for individuals and investors but also disrupted the development projects. The Apex court therefore set aside the HC order.
Challenges:
Implementing reforms in any legal system, including Bail law reforms, is often accompanied by various challenges. These challenges can arise from institutional, legal, social, and political factors that may hinder the smooth and effective implementation of the intended changes. Some common challenges in enacting and implementing bail law reforms include:
Resistance from Traditional Practices: Legal systems often have deeply ingrained traditional practices and attitudes, making it challenging to introduce new Bail laws or alter existing ones. Resistance from legal practitioners, law enforcement, and even some judges who are accustomed to the status quo may impede reform efforts.
Bail for Economic Offenses: Determining bail in cases involving economic offenses can be complex, especially when it comes to assessing the risk of the accused absconding or continuing fraudulent activities.
Technological Challenges:In the digital age, there might be concerns related to cybercrime and the misuse of technology to manipulate evidence or threaten witnesses, complicating the bail decision process.
Balancing Rights and Public Safety: One of the significant challenges in Bail law reforms is finding the right balance between protecting individual rights and ensuring public safety. Releasing under-trial prisoners raises concerns about potential risks to public safety, leading to resistance from law enforcement or victims’ rights advocates.
Inconsistent Judicial Interpretation: Bail decisions may vary from court to court, leading to inconsistent application of the law and uncertainty in the minds of both accused persons and the public