Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, original accused in a criminal case, had been granted regular bail by the Sessions Court. Subsequently, the prosecution sought to add offences under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (MPID Act) and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) to the existing charges under the Indian Penal Code. Upon the prosecution's request, the Sessions Court cancelled the bail under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC). The petitioners challenged this cancellation before the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad. The High Court held that its jurisdiction under Section 439(2) CrPC is revisional in nature, not appellate, and is limited to examining the correctness, legality, and propriety of the order. Interference is warranted only if the order is perverse or arbitrary. The court found that the Sessions Court's order was based on the valid ground that more stringent offences were added after the grant of bail, which justified cancellation. The petitioners' attempt to re-appreciate the evidence and argue that the cancellation was unwarranted was rejected. The High Court dismissed both criminal writ petitions, upholding the cancellation of bail.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Cancellation of Bail - Section 439(2) CrPC - Scope of Revisional Power - The High Court, while examining an order cancelling bail under Section 439(2) CrPC, does not sit as an appellate court but exercises revisional jurisdiction limited to examining the correctness, legality, and propriety of the order. Interference is warranted only if the order is perverse or arbitrary, not merely because a different view is possible. (Paras 5-6)
B) Criminal Procedure - Cancellation of Bail - Addition of Stringent Offences - Section 439(2) CrPC - The addition of more stringent offences, such as those under the MPID Act and the SC/ST Act, after the grant of regular bail, constitutes a valid ground for cancellation of bail. The Sessions Court's order cancelling bail on this ground was neither perverse nor arbitrary. (Paras 7-8)
C) Criminal Procedure - Cancellation of Bail - Re-appreciation of Evidence - Section 439(2) CrPC - The High Court, in revisional jurisdiction, cannot re-appreciate evidence to substitute its own view for that of the Sessions Court. The petitioners' attempt to re-argue the merits of the bail cancellation was impermissible. (Para 6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Sessions Court's order cancelling the regular bail granted to the petitioners under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, after the prosecution sought to add offences under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989, was perverse or arbitrary, warranting interference by the High Court.
Final Decision
Both Criminal Writ Petition No.221 of 2021 and Criminal Writ Petition No.222 of 2021 are dismissed. The Sessions Court's order cancelling the petitioners' regular bail is upheld.
Law Points
- Cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) CrPC requires showing of perversity or arbitrariness
- not mere re-appreciation of evidence
- addition of stringent offences like MPID Act and SC/ST Act after grant of bail is a valid ground for cancellation
- High Court's revisional power under Section 439(2) is limited to examining correctness
- legality
- and propriety of the order.
Case Details
2021 LawText (BOM) (07) 12
Criminal Writ Petition No.221 of 2021 and Criminal Writ Petition No.222 of 2021
Mr. Rajendrra S. Deshmukkh, Senior advocate i/b. Mr. Vikhe Pratap B. for Petitioners; Mr. D.R. Kale, PP for Respondents/State; Mr. S. S. Rathi, Advocate for Assist to PP
Nana @ Narsing Vishwarasrao Nayak, Rajkumar @ Raju S/o Vilas Nagre, Kailas S/o Subhash Manbolkar, Balaji S/o. Narayan Sangle, Bhagwat S/o Babarao Bangar, Laxman S/o Vilas Nagre
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petitions challenging the cancellation of regular bail under Section 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Remedy Sought
The petitioners sought to quash the Sessions Court's order cancelling their regular bail.
Filing Reason
The petitioners' regular bail was cancelled by the Sessions Court upon the prosecution's request to add more stringent offences under the MPID Act and SC/ST Act.
Previous Decisions
The Sessions Court had initially granted regular bail to the petitioners, but later cancelled it under Section 439(2) CrPC after the prosecution sought to add additional offences.
Issues
Whether the Sessions Court's order cancelling bail under Section 439(2) CrPC was perverse or arbitrary.
Whether the addition of more stringent offences after grant of bail constitutes a valid ground for cancellation of bail.
Submissions/Arguments
The petitioners argued that the Sessions Court's order cancelling bail was perverse and arbitrary, and that the High Court should interfere.
The respondent/State supported the Sessions Court's order, contending that the addition of stringent offences justified cancellation.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court, in revisional jurisdiction under Section 439(2) CrPC, cannot re-appreciate evidence and can only interfere if the order is perverse or arbitrary. The addition of more stringent offences after grant of bail is a valid ground for cancellation, and the Sessions Court's order was neither perverse nor arbitrary.
Judgment Excerpts
The petitioners are impugning the order whereby the regular bail granted to them under the provision of Section 439 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been cancelled, post a request put up by the prosecution, to add, in addition to the earlier sections under the Indian Penal Code, the offences punishable under the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 and the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
The High Court, while examining an order cancelling bail under Section 439(2) CrPC, does not sit as an appellate court but exercises revisional jurisdiction limited to examining the correctness, legality, and propriety of the order. Interference is warranted only if the order is perverse or arbitrary, not merely because a different view is possible.
Procedural History
The petitioners were granted regular bail by the Sessions Court. Subsequently, the prosecution sought to add offences under the MPID Act and SC/ST Act. The Sessions Court, upon the prosecution's request, cancelled the bail under Section 439(2) CrPC. The petitioners challenged this cancellation by filing two criminal writ petitions before the High Court of Bombay at Aurangabad, which were heard and dismissed on 20.07.2021.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 439(2)
- Indian Penal Code, 1860:
- Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 1999:
- Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989:
