New Indian-Chennai News + more

 

Modifying the “bail is rule, jail exception“ view, the Supreme Court has held history-sheeters or habitual offenders to be a nuisance and terror to society and asked courts to be cautious in granting bail to such individuals who are not on a par with a first-time offender.

A bench of Justices Dipak Misra and Prafulla C Pant said discretionary power of courts to grant bail must be exercised in a judicious manner in case of a habitual offender who should not be enlarged on bail merely on the ground of parity if other accused in the case were granted the relief.

The SC, which has in a slew of cases taken a pro-bail stance, said that criminal past of the accused must be checked before granting bail. It said that courts should not grant bail in a whimsical manner . In the past it has held that seriousness of offence is not the only ground to deny bail, that compelling circumstances are needed to cancel bail and that interests of individual must be balanced against those of society.

The bench's observation came as it quashed an order of he Allahabad high court grant ng bail to a history-sheeter in a murder case without taking in o account the criminal antecedents of the accused who was nvolved in seven other heinous offences including murder .

“A history-sheeter involved n the nature of crimes which ... are not minor offences so hat he is not to be retained in custody , but the crimes are of heinous nature and such crimes, by no stretch of imagi nation, can be regarded as jejune (simple)... The law expects the judiciary to be alert while admitting the plea of these kind of accused persons to be at large and, therefore, the emphasis is on exercise of discretion judiciously and not in a whimsical manner ,“ the SC said.

Referring to the number of cases filed against accused Santpal Yadav , the bench said “there can be no scintilla of doubt to name him a historysheeter“ and asked UP police to take him into custody forthwith if he had been enlarged on bail.