Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Respondent-Accused in Murder Case Due to Serious Offences. Bail Granted on Parity Basis Found Erroneous as Co-Accused's Bail Was Cancelled.

  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved a batch of five Special Leave Petitions (SLPs) arising from the Allahabad High Court's orders granting bail to five respondent-accused in a murder case. The appellant, Girraj, was the father of two sons, Gajendra and Akash, who were killed on 29 November 2019 during an incident involving the accused. The FIR was lodged on 30 November 2019, citing enmity due to party politics and detailing prior assaults on the appellant's sons by the accused. The High Court granted bail to the accused based on the principle of parity, referencing an earlier bail granted to co-accused Narendra. However, the Supreme Court later set aside the bail granted to Narendra, citing serious allegations and the nature of the offences involved. The court noted that the High Court had failed to consider the gravity of the situation and the specific allegations against the accused. The Supreme Court ultimately cancelled the bail of the five respondent-accused, allowing them to apply for bail afresh upon surrendering. The decision underscored the importance of the seriousness of the offences and the proper exercise of discretion in bail matters.

Headnote

A) Criminal Law - Bail Cancellation - Parity Principle - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 439 - The Supreme Court held that the bail granted to the respondent-accused must be cancelled following the cancellation of bail to co-accused Narendra, as the respondents sought bail on the basis of parity. The court emphasized the serious nature of the offences and the implications of unlawful assembly in the context of the case (Paras 18-19).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the bail granted to the respondent-accused should be cancelled based on the cancellation of bail to a co-accused.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court cancelled the bail granted to the five respondent-accused, Kiranpal, Sundar, Rakesh, Satish, and Dharmendra, based on the cancellation of bail to co-accused Narendra. The court directed the respondents to surrender and granted them liberty to apply for bail afresh upon surrendering within 24 hours.

Law Points

  • Bail cancellation
  • parity principle
  • serious offences
  • unlawful assembly
  • discretion under Section 439 CrPC
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2019 LawText (SC) (03) 229

Criminal Appeal Nos 286-290 of 2021

2021-03-08

Dr Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, M R Shah

Rajiv Garg, Vinod Diwakar, Rajul Bhargava

Girraj

Kiranpal and Others

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against bail orders granted by the High Court.

Remedy Sought

Cancellation of bail granted to the respondent-accused.

Filing Reason

The appellant contended that the bail was granted erroneously based on parity with a co-accused whose bail was later cancelled.

Previous Decisions

The High Court had granted bail to the respondent-accused based on an earlier order granting bail to co-accused Narendra.

Issues

Whether the bail granted to the respondent-accused should be cancelled based on the cancellation of bail to a co-accused. Whether the principle of parity was correctly applied in granting bail to the respondents.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the bail granted to the respondents should be cancelled following the cancellation of bail to co-accused Narendra. The respondents contended that there were distinguishing circumstances that justified their bail.

Ratio Decidendi

The court emphasized that the serious nature of the offences and the principle of parity necessitated the cancellation of bail granted to the respondent-accused following the cancellation of bail to a co-accused.

Judgment Excerpts

The bail application is allowed. The orders passed by the High Court granting bail to the five respondent – accused shall stand cancelled.

Procedural History

The appellant filed Special Leave Petitions against the High Court's bail orders. The High Court granted bail to the respondent-accused based on parity with co-accused Narendra. The Supreme Court later cancelled the bail of Narendra, leading to the appeal for cancellation of bail for the remaining accused.

Acts & Sections

  • Indian Penal Code, 1860: 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 323, 342, 508
  • Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: 439
  • Arms Act, 1959: 27, 30
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Dismisses Second Appeal in Property Dispute — Admission in Cross-Examination Sufficient to Prove Title. Court holds that an admission by the defendant in cross-examination regarding the plaintiff's ownership can be relied upon to ...
Related Judgement
High Court Bombay High Court Allows Writ Petitions Against Levy of Excise Duty on Fabrication and Construction of Structurals - Activities Do Not Amount to Manufacture Under Section 2(f) of Central Excise Act, 1944. Fabrication at site results in immovable prop...