Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 23 views

    Wrongful Cancellation of Bail Bond by Magistrate.-An Accused Applied For Transfer of His

    Uploaded by

    Nidhi Gupta
    The document discusses several cases related to the wrongful cancellation of bail by magistrates in India. In the first case, a magistrate cancelled bail after the accused applied for transfer of the case to a higher court, which created a reasonable apprehension that the accused would not receive a fair trial. In the second case, a magistrate threatened and cancelled bail on multiple adjournments, again creating apprehension, so transfer was ordered. In the third case, bail was cancelled after the accused refused to purchase war fund flags, as the accused believed, so there were grounds for transfer due to apprehension of unfair treatment.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Wrongful Cancellation of Bail Bond by Magistrate.-An Accused Applied For Transfer of His

    Uploaded by

    Nidhi Gupta
    23 views2 pages
    The document discusses several cases related to the wrongful cancellation of bail by magistrates in India. In the first case, a magistrate cancelled bail after the accused applied for transfer of the case to a higher court, which created a reasonable apprehension that the accused would not receive a fair trial. In the second case, a magistrate threatened and cancelled bail on multiple adjournments, again creating apprehension, so transfer was ordered. In the third case, bail was cancelled after the accused refused to purchase war fund flags, as the accused believed, so there were grounds for transfer due to apprehension of unfair treatment.

    Original Description:

    I Have no idea dude. Just let me download my document.

    Original Title

    408 And 407

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document discusses several cases related to the wrongful cancellation of bail by magistrates in India. In the first case, a magistrate cancelled bail after the accused applied for transfer of the case to a higher court, which created a reasonable apprehension that the accused would not receive a fair trial. In the second case, a magistrate threatened and cancelled bail on multiple adjournments, again creating apprehension, so transfer was ordered. In the third case, bail was cancelled after the accused refused to purchase war fund flags, as the accused believed, so there were grounds for transfer due to apprehension of unfair treatment.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    23 views2 pages

    Wrongful Cancellation of Bail Bond by Magistrate.-An Accused Applied For Transfer of His

    Uploaded by

    Nidhi Gupta
    The document discusses several cases related to the wrongful cancellation of bail by magistrates in India. In the first case, a magistrate cancelled bail after the accused applied for transfer of the case to a higher court, which created a reasonable apprehension that the accused would not receive a fair trial. In the second case, a magistrate threatened and cancelled bail on multiple adjournments, again creating apprehension, so transfer was ordered. In the third case, bail was cancelled after the accused refused to purchase war fund flags, as the accused believed, so there were grounds for transfer due to apprehension of unfair treatment.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    of 2

      Wrongful cancellation of bail bond by Magistrate.

    -An accused applied for transfer of his


    case to the High Court without informing the trying Magistrate. The Magistrate examined a
    number of witnesses for the prosecution and also the accused. The accused in answer to one
    of the questions disclosed that he had applied for transfer and the Magistrate thereupon made
    an order stating that he refrained from taking further proceedings until the order of the High
    Court, but at the same time cancelled the bail, holding that there was prima facie evidence
    against the accused. It was held, that this was not either a correct or a consistent attitude for
    the Magistrate to adopt. Once having correctly expressed an opinion that he "refrained from
    further proceedings" in view of the application made to the High Court, he ought to have
    stayed his hands completely for the time and certainly he ought not to have taken the serious
    and drastic step of cancelling the bail bonds of the accused and that this proceeding was
    likely to produce a reasonable apprehension in the mind of the accused that he would not
    have a fair and impartial trial before the court, and this was, therefore, a fit case for
    transfer.1 It is very necessary that no person on trial before a court should have any fear that
    he may not receive absolutely fair treatment. On several adjournments being asked for, which
    could not be ascribed to the accused, the Magistrate threatened that he would cancel the bail
    or proceed with the case. Subsequently he did cancel the bail, but when his order was set
    aside by the session's court, he demanded execution of new bonds. This order again was
    reversed by the session's court. It was held, that though the Magistrate was actuated in his
    orders only by a desire to dispose of the case without delay, still there was some ground
    which caused apprehension in the mind of the accused and transfer should be ordered. 2 The
    accused after having cross-examined the prosecution witnesses made an application for the
    stay of proceedings pending application for transfer of the case which they intended to make
    to the court of the Judicial Commissioner. The trial Magistrate stayed the proceedings for
    twelve days, but considering that the application was frivolous, and designed to prolong the
    case, cancelled the bail which had been previously granted. It was held, that the Magistrate's
    action in cancelling the bail bond was sufficient to create reasonable apprehension in the
    mind of the accused that fair trial was not likely to be received and hence the transfer of the
    case was proper.3 The accused were being tried before a Magistrate and were on bail. When
    the prosecution evidence was almost complete, the Magistrate cancelled their bail. The
    accused thereupon moved for a transfer of the case on the ground, that the real reason why
    their bail was cancelled was because they refused to subscribe money for the purchase of War
    1
    AIR 1933 Oudh 480.
    2

    3
    AIR 1937 Pesh 20.
    Fund Flags when asked to do so by the Magistrate. It was held that whether the accused were
    or were not justified in believing that the reason for cancellation of their bail was their refusal
    to purchase War Fund Flags, and whether it be true or not, it must be considered that they had
    grounds for apprehension that it was their refusal to purchase those flags that led the
    Magistrate to cancel their bail and therefore there were sufficient grounds for transferring the
    case.4

    28. Stay of proceedings by High Court.-Sub-sections (8), (9) and (10) of the corresponding
    section 526 of the old Code under which a subordinate court was bound to stop all
    proceedings on the mere intimation of an interested party that it intended to apply to the High
    Court or the court of session for the transfer of the case, were subject to "gross abuse". Those
    provisions were the subject-matter of scrutiny and criticism on several occasions. The Law
    Commission examined the provisions and the criticism and recommended that those sub-
    sections providing for a mandatory stay in trials and appeals should be deleted. However, the
    Joint Committee of Parliament was of opinion that those provisions should be retained with
    an additional precaution for payment of costs to the opposite party when the court considered
    it necessary. But the Minister of State in the Ministry of Home Affairs, who moved the
    amendment for deletion of those sub-sections in the Rajya Sabha, during the passage of the
    Code, observed:
    "It will speed up the process of trial. Many times people with resources resort to these
    stratagems because a poor man who is not properly represented would not resort to these
    stratagems for extending the trial. It is only the resourceful people, people with money,
    people with knowledge, resort to such things and.........we should not be a party to such
    procedural stratagems which might indefinitely postpone the trial". 5Consequently, those
    provisions were deleted in section 407. Instead, the High Court has been given power, if it is
    satisfied that it is necessary to do so in the interests of justice, to stay the proceedings in the
    subordinate court pending the disposal of application for transfer on such terms as the High
    Court may think fit to impose, though such stay would not affect the subordinate court's
    power of remand under section 309 of the Code6

    4
    AIR 1943 Pat 143.
    5
     See Rajya Sabha Debates, dated 13.12.1972.
    6
    407 (6)

    You might also like