Section 439(2) Cr.P.C.- Bail cannot be cancelled merely for any perceived indiscipline by accused before granting Bail: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that cancellation of bail cannot be ordered merely for any perceived indiscipline on the part of the accused before granting bail.

“The powers of cancellation of bail cannot be approached as if of disciplinary proceedings against the accused”, the bench of Justices Dinesh Maheswari and Sudhanshu Dhulia observed. It added that section 439(2) Cr.P.C. is envisaged only in such cases where the liberty of the accused is going to be counteracting the requirements of a proper trial of the criminal cases.

In these cases, the Madhya Pradesh High Court set aside bail granted to an accused on the ground that the Trial court, while granting bail, had not adverted to a relevant fact that the accused was absconding and was arrested only later. The accused (the mother-in-law of the deceased) was charged under offences under Sections 304B, 498A read with Sections 34 of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 3/4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act. 

In appeal, the Apex Court bench noted that the power being exercised by the High Court was not that of a regular appeal or revision but, it was that of cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C.

“It remains trite that normally very cogent and overwhelming circumstances or grounds are required to cancel bail already granted. Ordinarily, unless a strong case based on any supervening event is made out, an order granting bail is not to be taken lightly interfered with under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. ……… If the Trial Court was satisfied that the accused was entitled to be given the concession of bail while putting her specific terms and conditions, the order so passed had neither been suffering from any fundamental error nor there was any other material factor for which the bail granted to the appellant was to be annulled”, the court said.

The Court further noticed that, before the High Court, the prosecution had no case that the accused had misused the liberty or had comported herself in any manner in violation of the conditions imposed on her.

“We are impelled to observe that power of cancellation of bail should be exercised with extreme care and circumspection; and such cancellation cannot be ordered merely for any perceived indisciple on the part of the accused before granting bail. in other words, the powers of cancellation of bail cannot be approached as if of disciplinary proceedings against the accused and in fact, in a case where bail has already been granted, it’s upsetting under Section 439(2) Cr.P.C. is envisaged only in such cases where the liberty of the accused is going to be counteracting the requirements of a proper trial of the criminal case. In the matter of the present nature, in our view, over-expansion of the issue was not required only for one reason that a particular factor was not stated by the Trial Court in its order granting bail”. The Court said while setting aside the High Court order.

Case Title: Bhuri Bai v. State of Madhya Pradesh 2022 (SC) 956, CrA 1972 of 2022, 11 November 2022.