4. bail. It is a stock argument on


Character, Means and Standing of the Accused.Where a prisoner is possessed of considerable property as to rule outthe possibility of his jumping bail and there is no allegation that he islikely to abscond, a Court is entitled to release him on bail.141 It may,however, be noted that in this case bail was allowed not on theground of applicant’s status alone but because he had been acquittedon the charge by the trial Court and the question of bail arose anappeal against the order of acquittal.The unanimous view of the High Court is that the social position orstatus of an accused person should not be taken into considerationwhen rejecting or allowing bail. The same view has been taken bythe High Court of Allahabad, Patna, Nagpur, Calcutta andHyderabad.142″The grant or refusal of bail will not depend upon the respectabilityor otherwise of an accused person. As a matter of fact the richer theaccused is, the more easy it is for him to find bail and the lessdesirable it is to release him on bail. It is a stock argument on behalfof a young offender coming from respectable family that he shouldnot be allowed to come inassociation with bad characters in jail.

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!

order now

Though the argument hassome force, yet after all it is an argument which can be raised inalmost every case because respectable men even if they are oldermay suffer deterioration from detention injail. A man is kept in prison not only to prevent his absconding but ifthere is reason to believe that he has committed crimes of a certaintype to prevent him from being a possible danger to the community.141Nanda Kumar ShuklaVs. State 1952 CrLJ 1085.142Fazal Nawaz Jung Vs. State of Hyderabad, 1952 CrLJ 873.The mere respectability of a man per se is not a sufficient ground toallow bail when he has been convicted of a criminal offence.Sometimes the position and status of a person instead of being aground for allowance of bail becomes an impediment in that, it isfeared that afair trial would be put in jeopardy.

A Court has then to considerwhether as a result of the grant of bail prosecution witnesses arelikely to be terrorized and would experience considerable difficultyin stepping into the witness box at the time of the trial. Just as a Highsocial position and status of the accused do not justify an order ofrelease on bail, in the same way the bad character of a man does notdisentitle him from being bailed out if the law allows it. 143A Court, however, will take into consideration the social status orthe position of an accused person in relation to other members of hisfamily, if he happens to be the only adult malemember or the only earning member of the family, other being eitherwomen or children, in deciding the question whether bail should orshould not be allowed.

His Lordship observed in the case of AhmadAli v. Emperor.144″His mother now puts in an affidavit complaining that she is in aserious distress as the petitioner is the only member of the familywho earns anything for its support. The family consists of thepetitioner’s wife and two small children in addition to his mother. Itfurther appears that innocent persons are suffering by the reason ofthe petitioner’s incarceration.

His Lordship enlarged the accused on bail. This was a case undersection 363, IPC. But in a case of murder the fact that the accusedwas a ‘Gosain’ and there was no member in his family who couldlook after his case was not considered a good ground by Bennet, J torelease him on bail.115In the case of Raja NarendraLal Khan,145a superficial reading of thejudgment might give the impression that the accused was released on143 113 RaoHarnam Singh Vs. State, 1958 CrLJ 563: AR 1958 Punj 123.14416 CrLJ 705: 301 C 993.145 9 CrLJ 375: 36 Cal 166bail because he was a man of wealth and position. The reason for hisrelease was that there wasno convincing direct evidence against him when the application forbail was moved on his behalf.

5. Health of Accused.The proviso to section 437, Cr. P.C. authorizes the Magistrate toadmit a sick or infirm accused to bail even when he is reasonablybelieved to be involved in an offence punishable with death or lifeimprisonment etc. One M.

Hanumantha Reddy was charged with anoffence under section 307, I.P.C. He was the son of a responsibleofficer in government service.

The doctor who was treating theaccused certified that the petitioner suffered from neurastheniaassociated with mental delusions and a suicidal frame of mind. Inthesecircumstances the Mysore High Court granted bail to theaccused.119 But it is not every sickness or infirmity that entitles aperson to be released on bail. The circumstances of the case and thecumulative effect, the seriousness of sickness or infirmity, theavailability of necessary medical treatment and reasonable amenitieshave also to be borne in mind. Where a Court does not consider itdesirable to enlarge an accused person on bail on the ground ofsickness or infirmity, he may request the Court that is mayrecommend to the state government to afford him adequate facilitiesand more genial surroundings, subject of course, to the jaildiscipline.146If an accused person desires to be released on bail on the ground ofthe health, he must produce some evidence at least in the shape of anaffidavit to enable the Court to exercise the discretion in his favour.A mere medical certificate of illness is not sufficient; the certificatemust also show that the health of the accused will deteriorate if he isnot released.

Bail on the ground of sickness is to be refused when146Fazal Nawaz Jung Vs,.State of Hyderabad, 1952 CrLJ 873proper treatment is available in jail. When E. C.G. result is notcorrelated to prescription of doctor and there is no illnessnecessitating immediate release and there is assurance of betterlooking after in jail hospital and proper medical assistance, bail is tobe refused.

147Sickness contemplated in the proviso to section 437 is one whichinvolves danger to life of the accused. In a case Supreme Courtreleased a lady-prisoner, a foreigner who was serving lifeimprisonment and was also facing trial in other criminal cases, onbail she had been suffering from ovarian cancer at secondary stagenecessitating chemotherapy. In that case the Supreme Courtpermitted her to go back to Canada, her home-land where herparents lived.148In a case Simpson A.J.C. considered the extreme old age of theapplicant as one of the grounds for grant of bail to the petitioner.

1496. Age or Sex of the Accused.Under the proviso to sub-section (1) of section 437 a Court maydirect thatany person under the age of sixteen years or any woman,accused of an offence,even though punishable with death orimprisonment for life, may be released onbail. The question arosewhether the proviso is discriminatory on ground of sexand age andhence ultravires of the constitution in the case of Mst. ChokhivState150″because article 15 of the constitution


I'm Mary!

Would you like to get a custom essay? How about receiving a customized one?

Check it out