9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
- Bail application filed based on the release of other accused on bail by a different judge. - Consideration of similar cases for granting bail. - Discrepancy in decision-making process between different judges. - Application of consistent principles in granting bail. Analysis: The judgment pertains to a bail application filed by the accused-petitioners based on the release of other accused on bail by a different judge. The judge notes that the earlier bail application of the accused-petitioners was dismissed on merits due to the severe injuries sustained by the deceased and the superficial injuries suffered by the accused-persons. However, subsequent bail applications on behalf of different accused were granted by another judge. The judge acknowledges that the decision of the previous judge was not brought to the notice of the judge granting bail to the other accused, which could have impacted the outcome. The judge emphasizes the importance of consistency in decision-making and the need for all relevant information to be considered before granting bail. The judge highlights the principle that similarly situated accused should be treated similarly in bail matters. Despite reservations about the merits of the case, the judge decides to grant bail to the accused-petitioners based on the fact that other accused in similar circumstances were released on bail by a different judge. The judge directs the release of the accused-petitioners on bail upon furnishing a personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the Sessions Judge for their appearance in court. In conclusion, the judgment underscores the importance of consistency and fairness in the bail decision-making process. It emphasizes the need for all relevant information to be considered and brought to the court's attention to ensure a just outcome. The judge's decision to grant bail to the accused-petitioners is based on the principle of treating similarly situated individuals equally, despite earlier rejection on merits.
|
