Case Note & Summary
The applicant, Kashinath Jairam Shetye, filed a criminal application before the Bombay High Court at Goa seeking cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.1, Ramakant Mahadev Sawant, by the Sessions Judge, North Goa, Panaji, vide order dated 23rd August 2012. The applicant also sought an inquiry against the learned Sessions Judge for not disposing of the anticipatory bail application expeditiously. The High Court, comprising Justices A.P. Lavande and U.V. Bakre, heard the matter. The applicant was represented by Ms. Prema Mathkar, respondent No.1 by Mr. D. Pangam, and respondents No.2 and 3 (Police Inspector and State of Goa) by Advocate General Mr. A.N.S. Nadkarni. The Court noted that the application for cancellation of bail would ordinarily lie before a Single Judge under the Bombay High Court, Appellate Side Rules, but since the issue of delay was raised, the matter was placed before a Division Bench. The Court observed that cancellation of bail requires supervening circumstances or misuse of liberty, and mere delay in disposal of the anticipatory bail application is not a ground for cancellation. The Court also declined to hold an inquiry against the Sessions Judge, stating that the issue of delay was addressed by laying down guidelines for expeditious disposal of anticipatory bail applications. The Court dismissed the application for cancellation of bail and the prayer for inquiry, but issued guidelines directing Sessions Courts to dispose of anticipatory bail applications expeditiously, preferably on the same day or within a few days.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Cancellation of Bail - Section 439(2) CrPC - The applicant sought cancellation of anticipatory bail granted to respondent No.1 on grounds of delay in disposal of the bail application by the Sessions Judge. The Court held that cancellation of bail requires supervening circumstances or misuse of liberty, and mere delay in disposal does not warrant cancellation. The application for cancellation was dismissed. (Paras 3-5) B) Criminal Procedure Code - Anticipatory Bail - Expeditious Disposal - Section 438 CrPC - The Court addressed the issue of delay in disposal of anticipatory bail applications by Sessions Courts. It held that such applications should be disposed of expeditiously, preferably on the same day or within a few days, and laid down guidelines for the same. (Paras 4-5) C) Criminal Procedure Code - Inquiry Against Judicial Officer - The applicant sought an inquiry against the learned Sessions Judge for delay in disposal. The Court declined to hold such inquiry, stating that the issue of delay was addressed by laying down guidelines. (Para 3)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the bail granted to respondent No.1 by the Sessions Judge should be cancelled and whether an inquiry should be held against the learned Sessions Judge for not disposing of the anticipatory bail application expeditiously.
Final Decision
The application for cancellation of bail and the prayer for inquiry against the Sessions Judge are dismissed. The Court lays down guidelines for expeditious disposal of anticipatory bail applications by Sessions Courts.
Law Points
- Cancellation of bail requires supervening circumstances or misuse of liberty
- mere delay in disposal of anticipatory bail application is not a ground for cancellation
- anticipatory bail applications should be disposed of expeditiously preferably on the same day or within a few days
- guidelines for disposal of anticipatory bail applications
