Case Title: Ajeet Chaudhary v. State of U.P. and Another [Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. - 45784 of 2020]
Directions and Observations of the Justice Ajay Bhanot
• While taking account of the concerns of both the parties regarding the fact that certain practices of hearing of bail applications/bail appeals under 'The Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989', the Allahabad High Court on Monday (11th January) issued directions regarding placing of bail application/bail appeal under the Act while maintaining timely delivery of the notice of victim, before the Court
• The Bench of Justice Ajay Bhanot observed that Bail applications should be processed expeditiously before presenting it to the court to make sure of the hearing within a reasonable and definite time frame.
• The Court made a further observation which included that, “Failure to serve notice of bail upon the victim, is the failure of the State to perform its statutory function. The accused cannot be visited with penal consequences for the default of the State. The erring officials have to be proceeded against as per law.”
• The court commented that after the expiry of the certainly provided timeline, placement of the bail application/bail appeal before the court cannot be deferred for non-service of notice.
• The court directed the Director-General of Police to create a committee at State Level which would be headed by Officer, not below the rank of Additional Director General of Police. The Committee has been directed to submit its report on an annual basis and present it to the State Government and make all the necessary recommendations required.
Maturation of a Bail Application/ Bail Appeal:
It can be considered that the procedure of maturation of a bail application before it is placed before the Court, is presented in Rule 18 of Chapter 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules.
However, later on, some certain necessary amendments were made on the Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, reducing the period of notice of bail following from ten to two days.
Keeping this in mind the Court specifically appreciated the efforts that were put in by Advocate Haider Rizvi, to take the initiative to reform the bail procedures in this Court, and make them result in consistence with Articles 14 and 21 of the Constitution of India. It was due to his efforts, that the period of notice resulted in a reduction from ten days to two days.
Relevant Provisions of the SC & ST Act:
It is necessary to take note that under the SC & ST Act, rights victim and witnesses and provisions for grant of bail have received its special attention in Section 15 (A), (3) and (5) of the Act.
Section 15 (5) of the Act is a stage which is subsequent to Section 15 (3) of the Act. Section 15 (5) comes in effect only where the victim exercises his/her right to be heard when the bail is presented to the Court after its period of maturation.
It shall be noted that according to Section 15 (A) and (3), the State Government or Special Public Prosecutor is nominated as the sole agency who holds the exclusive statutory duty to inform the victim about the present bail proceedings.
It shall be understood that the phrase used under Section 15 (3) of the Act, “reasonable, accurate and timely notice to the victim” specifies that the victim has to be given proper time to prepare his/her defence, before placing of the matter before the Court.
On this matter, the Court remarked,
"Direct responsibility for service of bail notice upon the victim under the Act is upon the State. The Act does not contemplate sending of bail notice to the victim by the Court.”
Click here to download the copy of the original judgment
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
