Supreme Court: Court cannot delay execution of bail order after accused is entitled to bail

The Supreme Court ruled on Monday (September 2) that if a court finds that an accused is entitled to bail, it cannot delay the implementation of the bail order as doing so could be a violation of the rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution.

A bank made of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Augustine George Masih has set aside the condition imposed by the Patna High Court while granting bail to an accused, namely that the bail order will be executed after six months. The Patna High Court has not mentioned any reason for imposing such a condition in the impugned judgment.

“The contested judgment presumes that the applicant is entitled to bail and, in fact, the contested decision grants him bail. However, paragraph 9 states that the decision granting bail must be executed after 6 months. Once the court comes to the conclusion that an accused is entitled to bail, it cannot delay the grant of bail. If the court, after finding that an accused is entitled to bail, starts delaying the order granting bail, it may amount to a violation of the rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.”, the court decided.

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in part and deleted the words “but after 6 months from today” from paragraph 9 of the impugned judgment. The court also observed that the appellant Jitendra Paswan had already been released on interim bail as per its earlier order and directed that such interim bail would continue till the completion of the trial.

Earlier, the Supreme Court had on July 12 expressed its concerns over the “strange” order of the Patna HC. Justice Abhay Oka had observed: “What kind of order is that? Some courts grant bail for six months or a year. This is another kind. It says he is entitled to bail but should be released after six months.”

The complainant is involved in a case under Sections 147, 148, 149, 341, 323, 324, 326, 307 and 302 of the IPC. The FIR has been filed against 19 named accused, including Paswan, for allegedly attacking the informant and his family when they were protesting against the accused ploughing their field. Specifically, it is alleged that the other accused attacked the informant's family at the instigation of Paswan.

The Supreme Court granted Paswan bail, effective six months from the date of the order, with bail amounting to Rs 30,000 and two sureties. He also imposed several conditions, including regular court appearances, monthly attendance at the police station and a restraining order against tampering with evidence or committing any further crimes.

Case No. – Crl.A. No. 3648/2024; Diary No. 27639 / 2024

Case Title – Jitendra Paswan Satya Mitra v. State of Bihar