TMI Blog2009 (2) TMI 837X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facing trial for alleged commission of offences punishable under Sections 10, 13, 18 and 29 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (in short the Act') and Sections 3 and 4 of The Arms Act, 1959 (In Short The Arms Act') and Section 353 read with Sections 34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short the IPC'). The High Court referred to the circumstances highlighted by the parties and came to hold that the accusations/imputation do not constitute the charged offences. Accordingly, bail was granted subject to certain conditions. 3. Learned counsel for the appellant submitted that the High Court has misconceived the scope and ambit of the provisions and misinterpreted the ingredients of the offence and came to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... court has directed stay of the impugned order. It is stated that the accused persons were sent to custody in view of the order and are presently in custody. 8. While dealing with an application for bail, there is a need to indicate in the order, reasons for prima facie concluding why bail was being granted particularly where an accused was charged of having committed a serious offence. It is necessary for the courts dealing with application for bail to consider among other circumstances, the following factors also before granting bail, they are: 1. The nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence; 2. Reasonable apprehension of tampering of the witness or apprehe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l was being granted particularly where the accused is charged of having committed a serious offence. Any order devoid of such reasons would suffer from non-application of mind. It is also necessary for the court granting bail to consider among other circumstances, the following factors also before granting bail; they are: (a) The nature of accusation and the severity of punishment in case of conviction and the nature of supporting evidence. (b) Reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant. (c) Prima facie satisfaction of the court in support of the charge. (See Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh (2002 (3) SC 598) and Puran v. Rambilas (2001 (6) SCC 338). 12. It ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ever, a Court of Session had admitted an accused person to bail, the State has two options. It may move the Sessions Judge if certain new circumstances have arisen which were not earlier known to the State and necessarily, therefore, to that court. The State may as well approach the High Court being the superior court under Section 439(2) to commit the accused to custody. When, however, the State is aggrieved by the order of the Sessions Judge granting bail and there are no new circumstances that have cropped up except those already existing, it is futile for the State to move the Sessions Judge again and it is competent in law to move the High Court for cancellation of the bail. This position follows from the subordinate position of the Co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
