Bail Discretion Power Ought Not To Be Used Arbitrarily, Capriciously And Injudiciously: SC
🔹 Principle:
“Bail discretion power ought not to be used arbitrarily, capriciously and injudiciously”
— Supreme Court of India
🔹 Meaning:
The power to grant or deny bail is a discretionary judicial function.
However, this discretion is not absolute or unfettered.
It must be exercised reasonably, based on sound legal principles, and in accordance with established judicial norms.
Arbitrary, capricious, or irrational exercise of bail discretion can lead to miscarriage of justice.
🔹 Key Judicial Reasoning:
The Supreme Court has consistently emphasized that:
Judges must apply their mind and record valid reasons when granting or denying bail.
Discretion must be based on:
Nature and gravity of the offence
Evidence collected
Likelihood of the accused fleeing
Possibility of tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses
Past conduct of the accused
The liberty of the accused must be balanced with the interests of society and victims.
🔹 Landmark Case Law:
1. State of Rajasthan v. Balchand, AIR 1977 SC 2447
Justice Krishna Iyer stated:
"Bail is the rule, jail is the exception."
But added that discretion must not be used whimsically or on extraneous considerations.
2. Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, AIR 1978 SC 429
Emphasized that judicial discretion must be guided by reason, fairness, and legality, not personal biases.
3. Prahlad Singh Bhati v. NCT of Delhi, AIR 2001 SC 1444
The Supreme Court observed:
“The jurisdiction to grant bail has to be exercised on the basis of well-settled principles, and not in a mechanical or arbitrary manner.”
4. Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan, AIR 2005 SC 921
The court held that bail orders without proper reasoning or in disregard of legal principles are liable to be set aside.
🔹 Why This Principle Is Important:
| Reason | Explanation |
|---|---|
| ✅ Prevents misuse of judicial power | Ensures accountability and integrity in the bail process |
| ✅ Ensures consistency in bail orders | Avoids disparity between similar cases |
| ✅ Protects public trust in judiciary | Prevents perception of bias or corruption |
| ✅ Balances rights of the accused and victim | Protects the accused's liberty while safeguarding societal interest |
🔹 Practical Implication:
Judges must record reasons while granting or denying bail.
Bail should not be influenced by political pressure, media coverage, or emotional appeals.
A non-speaking bail order (without reasons) can be challenged and set aside.
Higher courts can intervene if discretion is misused.
🔹 Conclusion:
The Supreme Court has made it clear:
The power to grant or deny bail is a trust, not a privilege.
It must be exercised judiciously, transparently, and within the boundaries of law. Discretion without discipline leads to injustice.
RELATED Blog
0 comments