• Challenge SC decision to grant bail on wrong grounds

I want to challenge Supreme court decision to grant a bail for Petitioner whose trial is in process U.S IPC 420,406. His bail applications rejected consecutively from session and High court and he was behind bars since Sept'15. Now SC evicted him on 13th May'16 on grounds "Considering the totality of the facts of the case and the fact that the accused appellant is in custody since September, 2015 and also the fact that trial is yet to commence, we are inclined to release the appellant on bail."
Application filed in SC in month of Feb'16. We have already trial on-going in trial court where First Evidence recorded on 14th Dec'15.
I want to understand how can i move SC against this ruling and put the accused behind bars again?
Asked 4 months ago in Criminal Law from Delhi, Delhi
Religion: Hindu
SC has passed reasoned order releasing accused on bail since he has been in jail for 10 months 

2) if you are aggrieved by order you cna file review petition but chances of success are bleak 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23315 Answers
1220 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Please do understand what is bail?
Bail, in law, means procurement of release from prison of a person awaiting trial or an appeal, by the deposit of security to ensure his submission at the required time to legal authority.
The process of obtaining bail from Supreme Court of India is by way of filing a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court of India against the orders of the High Court rejecting the bail. The process of obtaining bail from Supreme Court of India has not been specifically defined under any special law as the person affected by the dismissal of the bail petition from High Court has the only option to approach the Supreme Court by way of filing a SLP and showing the irregularities, illegalities and perversity of the orders passed by the High Court and seek the leave to appeal against the orders of the High Court rejecting the bail application.
The SLP under Article 136 of the Constitution of India is the most prevalent and common petition filed before the Supreme Court of India against the orders of the High Courts.Once the SLP for obtaining bail from Supreme Court of India is listed for hearing before the Court, the Court can either issue notice to the state concerned or the matter is dismissed by the court instantly. In the event of the court issuing a notice in the SLP in Supreme Court of India, the petition has to file the process fee and the sets of the petition for service of the notice on the other party. The Registry of the Supreme Court of India thereafter issues the notice to the respondent party who can appear before the court in accordance with the rules in SLP in Supreme Court of India. The SLP is thereafter heard and decided by the Supreme Court in accordance with the law and the orders under challenge are upheld, quashed or modified accordingly by the Supreme Court of India. If the Supreme Court of India is satisfied by the case the order for bail is granted by the court and in most of the cases when notices are issued by the court, there is an interim order protecting the applicant from being arrested which is called the interim order.

So better to do the trial immediately and bring the evidence before the court  which leads to a to an order of conviction. And put the accused behind bars permanently. 
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1916 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
The right to bail is concomitant of the accusatory system which favours a bail system that ordinarily enables a person to stay out of jail until a trial has found him/her guilty. Article 21 of the Constitution is said to enshrine the most important human rights in criminal jurisprudence. The Supreme  Court had for almost 27 years after the enactment of the Constitution taken the view that this Article merely embodied a facet of the Diceyian concept of the rule of law that no one can deprived of his life and personal liberty by the executive action unsupported by law. If there was a law which provided some sort of procedure, it was enough to deprive a person of his life and personal liberty. However Maneka Gandhi v. Union of India[12] marked a watershed in the history of constitutional law and Article 21 assumed a new dimension wherein the Supreme Court for the first time took the view that Article 21 affords protection also against legislation (and not just executive action) and no law can deprive a person of his/her life or personal liberty unless it prescribes a procedure which is reasonable, fair and just it would be for the court to determine whether the procedure is reasonable, fair and just ; if not, it would be struck down as invalid.
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1916 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
There is no court higher than the SC. The only remedy against the order of the SC is to file a review petition before it which will be heard by the same bench, but it is most unlikely that it will succeed.
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18167 Answers
449 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
1) lawyer of Petitionets must have suppressed material facts form SC 

2) you can present true facts to SC 

3) SC must have not gone through the case diary 

4) file review petition before SC as Petitionets have obtained bail by suppressing  material facts 
Ajay Sethi
Advocate, Mumbai
23315 Answers
1220 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
1. It is a common tendency of the litigants to bow down before the lawyer if he gets a favourable order, and to pin the blame for an adverse order on the inability of the lawyer to present the facts and law in their proper perspective.

2. The trial does not start from the day on which the accused is first brought to the court. You need to know the meaning of the trial.

3. The facts and circumstances of every case are different, so any parallel with Sahara's case is misconceived.

4. The writing is on the wall for you i.e bail has been granted to the accused by the highest court of India, so read it,
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18167 Answers
449 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
The provisions for holding a person in custody for the purpose of furthering investigation, in India are governed by Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 167 of the Code allows that a person may be held in the custody of the police for a period of 15 days on the orders of a magistrate. A judicial magistrate may remand a person to any form of custody extending up to 15 days and an executive magistrate may order for a period of custody extending up to 7 days. A person may be held in the custody of the police or in judicial custody. Police custody may extend only up to a period of 15 days from the date custody begins but judicial custody may extend to a period of 90 days for a crime which entails a punishment of death, life imprisonment or period of imprisonment exceeding 10 years and 60 days for all other crimes if the magistrate is convinced that sufficient reasons exists, following which the accused or suspect must be released on bail.

Therefore considering the period of judicial custody, the supreme court has granted bail to the accused.  
Until the charges are proved before the court, the accused cannot be held guilty of the charges agaisnt them. 
T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14090 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
***********************
SC Order -> "Considering the totality of the facts of the case and the fact that the accused appellant is in custody since September, 2015 and also the fact that trial is yet to commence, we are inclined to release the appellant on bail."
*******************************************************
Trial already started from the day accused was brought to Trial Court then why this reason has been quoted, they could have said since trial is ongoing and hence not proven guilty so bail is granted.


The beginning of trial mans after the charge sheet is filed and the trial shall commence by examining the witnesses. 
Until then the accused may be appearing before the court for normal hearings and for extension of remand. 



1] Can it happen that Lawyer of petitioner has not presented right facts OR it is not defended by the Lawyer of the State?

Who is the lawyer of the petitioner, what is the petition about and where it was filed?
Do you refer to an intervene petition filed by the defacto complainant objecting the grant of bail?
Please elaborate for rendering proper opinion.


2] Can I present the facts of ongoing Trial to SC bench who has given this order where they have said Trial is Yet to Commence?

There is no use because the actual trial has not begun and also the supreme court has already disposed the case granting bail. 





3] Why Subrata Roy or other cheaters who are held under IPC 420 are behind bars and can't be taken out given the same reasoning?

No comments


4] What does it mean when SC said Trial is yet to commence when it is already ongoing and they must have seen the Case Diary?

You should confirm that if the trial has actually began or not and then vent out your grievances.



T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14090 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0

Ask a Lawyer

Get legal answers from top-rated lawyers in 1 hour. It's quick, easy, and anonymous!
Ask a Lawyer

Criminal Lawyers

T Kalaiselvan
Advocate, Vellore
14090 Answers
127 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Ashish Davessar
Advocate, Jaipur
18167 Answers
449 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Krishna Kishore Ganguly
Advocate, Kolkata
12123 Answers
233 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Devajyoti Barman
Advocate, Kolkata
5234 Answers
54 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Nadeem Qureshi
Advocate, New Delhi
3537 Answers
130 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Atulay Nehra
Advocate, Noida
438 Answers
15 Consultations
4.7 on 5.0
Rajgopalan Sripathi
Advocate, Hyderabad
868 Answers
43 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
Shivendra Pratap Singh
Advocate, Lucknow
2760 Answers
41 Consultations
4.9 on 5.0
Ajay N S
Advocate, Ernakulam
1916 Answers
19 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0
S J Mathew
Advocate, Mumbai
1950 Answers
65 Consultations
5.0 on 5.0