Supreme Court: under which circumstances the magistrate can release accused on bail as per S.437(6) CrPC/S.480(6) BNSS
- The foregoing discussion lead us to conclude and answer the questions under reference as under:
Q-1 An Accused involved in a non-bailable offence triable by Magisterial Court whose trial is not concluded within a period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in that case, and who has been in custody during the whole of the said period, does not get an absolute or indefeasible right to be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate. The Magistrate has a discretion to direct otherwise (refuse bail) by recording in writing the reasons for such rejection.
Q-2 The provisions contained in Section 437(6) of the Code are not mandatory.
Q-3 The Magistrate has option/discretion to refuse bail by assigning reasons therefor. The parameters, factors, circumstances and grounds to be considered by Magistrate vis-a-vis such application preferred by the Accused Under Section 437(6) of the Code may be:
- Whether the reasons for being unable to conclude trial within sixty days from the first date fixed of taking evidence, are attributable to the Accused?
- Whether there are any chances of the Accused tampering with evidence or causing prejudice to the case of the prosecution in any other manner?
- Whether there are any chances of abscondence of the Accused on being bailed out?
- Whether Accused was not in custody during the whole of the said period?
If the answer to any one of the above referred fact situations or similar fact situations is in affirmative than that would work as a fetter on the right that accrues to the Accused under first part of Sub-section (6) of Section 437 of the Code.
The right accrues to him only if he is in custody during the whole of the said period as can be seen from the language employed in Sub-section (6) of Section 437 of the Code by the legislature.
It would also be relevant to take into consideration the punishment prescribed for the offence for which the Accused is being tried in comparison to the time that the trial is likely to take, regard being had to the factors like volume of evidence, number of witnesses, workload on the Court, availability of prosecutor, number of Accused being tried with Accused and their availability for trial, etc.
The factors which are quoted above by this Court are only illustrative and not exhaustive.
Q-4 The factors, parameters, circumstances and grounds for seeking bail by the Accused as well as grounds to be considered by the learned Magistrate for his satisfaction would not be identical or similar to Sub-section (1) and Sub-section (2) of the Section 437 of the code, but may be relevant and overlapping each other depending upon facts and there cannot be any straight jacket formula. But, we may add that the reasons for rejection of applications Under Section 437(6) need to be more weighty than the routine grounds of rejection.
Q-5 The parameters relevant for deciding application Under Section 167(2)(a)(I)(II) of the Code (default bail), cannot be imported for exercise of power Under Section 437(6) of the Code.
Q-6 A decision in principle rendered by a coordinate Bench of equal strength would bind another co-ordinate Bench as it lays down a principle of law and not a statement of law in context of subject matter.
Q-7 The legislature, while enacting Section 437(6) of the Code, has not given an absolute, indefeasible or unfettered right of bail. But right of bail is given with a rider investing the Magistrate with discretion to refuse bail by recording reasons therefor. Therefore, the right of Accused for a speedy trial, though, Constitutional and aimed at liberty of Accused, is not put on that high a pedestal that it becomes absolute. It is a right given with reasonable restrictions. This is the only way the provisions of Section 473(6) of the Code and Article 21 of the Constitution of India can be harmonised and have to read and interpreted accordingly.
- In the overall view of the matter, we are convinced that the Appellant deserves to be released on bail, subject to certain terms and conditions as may be imposed by the Trial Court. IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 818/2025 (Arising out of Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 1314/2025)
Decided On: 18.02.2025
Subhelal Vs. The State of Chhattisgarh
Hon’ble Judges/Coram:
J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ.
Citation: 2025 INSC 242, MANU/SC/0235/2025
- Leave granted.