NEW DELHI: From now on, those filing bail petitions before any court will be required to disclose their criminal antecedents to enable the judge to take a holistic view of the nature of the person and consider whether he/she can pose danger to society on release from jail.
A Supreme Court bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta said that it would be appropriate for all high courts to amend their rules and adopt the Punjab and Haryana high court model which mandates bail applicants to disclose their criminal antecedents.
The Punjab and Haryana high court rules on bail application state: "In every application for bail presented to the high court, the petitioner shall state whether similar application has or has not been made to Supreme Court, and if made shall state the result thereof. The petitioner/applicant shall also mention whether he/she is/was involved in any other criminal case or not. If yes, particulars and decisions thereof. An application which does not contain this information shall be placed before the bench with the necessary information."
The bench said, "We feel that every high court in the country should consider incorporating a similar provision in the respective high court rules and/or criminal side rules as it would impose an obligation on the accused to make disclosures regarding his/her involvement in any other criminal case(s) previously registered."
Asking the SC registry to send a copy of the judgment to registrars general of all high courts to enable incorporation of a rule on the lines of Punjab and Haryana HC, the bench said, "Accounting for criminal antecedents of the accused while considering bail applications has been the subject matter of concern for courts across the country."
This direction came in a case where a magistrate was misled to grant bail to the main accused in a criminal case by making him believe that Rajasthan high court had granted bail to a co-accused. The HC had granted bail to an accused who was charged with a lesser offence in the case. While overturning the magistrate's order, the HC had strictured the judicial officer.
On an appeal by the judicial officer, Supreme Court said the strictures were uncalled for as it was done without calling for an explanation from the judicial officer, which is a breach of the principle of natural justice.
A Supreme Court bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta said that it would be appropriate for all high courts to amend their rules and adopt the Punjab and Haryana high court model which mandates bail applicants to disclose their criminal antecedents.
The Punjab and Haryana high court rules on bail application state: "In every application for bail presented to the high court, the petitioner shall state whether similar application has or has not been made to Supreme Court, and if made shall state the result thereof. The petitioner/applicant shall also mention whether he/she is/was involved in any other criminal case or not. If yes, particulars and decisions thereof. An application which does not contain this information shall be placed before the bench with the necessary information."
The bench said, "We feel that every high court in the country should consider incorporating a similar provision in the respective high court rules and/or criminal side rules as it would impose an obligation on the accused to make disclosures regarding his/her involvement in any other criminal case(s) previously registered."
Asking the SC registry to send a copy of the judgment to registrars general of all high courts to enable incorporation of a rule on the lines of Punjab and Haryana HC, the bench said, "Accounting for criminal antecedents of the accused while considering bail applications has been the subject matter of concern for courts across the country."
This direction came in a case where a magistrate was misled to grant bail to the main accused in a criminal case by making him believe that Rajasthan high court had granted bail to a co-accused. The HC had granted bail to an accused who was charged with a lesser offence in the case. While overturning the magistrate's order, the HC had strictured the judicial officer.
On an appeal by the judicial officer, Supreme Court said the strictures were uncalled for as it was done without calling for an explanation from the judicial officer, which is a breach of the principle of natural justice.
You may also like
NMC again threatens action against medical colleges not paying stipend
Oasis fans 'scrap' at final homecoming concert in brawl on 'Gallagher Hill'
Driver fails breath test after eating jackfruit
Justice Varma's plea to bin inquiry report may face maintainability hurdle in SC
SC: Bail seekers must disclose criminal priors
