2018 (2) TMI 2111 - SCH - Indian Laws

Declination to grant bail - investigation in this case is complete and the charge sheet has already been filed - HELD THAT - It is expedient to not express any opinion at this stage on the merits of the case, particularly in view of the pendency of trial. So far as the prayer of the appellant for bail is concerned, a perusal of the charge sheet indicates that the appellant accused is similarly placed with all the other accused and they were already released on bail. He is charged with Section 201 and 203 of the Indian Penal Code along with other accused. He is also charged with Section 120(B) and 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. Taking into consideration the medical reports of the appellant, it is necessary to grant bail to him. But, considering the apprehension expressed by the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the C.B.I., it is thought fit that the appellant, while on bail, should stay far away from the place of occurrence. The appellant is directed to be released on bail, subject to the fulfilment of conditions imposed - bail application allowed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
Grant of bail in a criminal case involving serious charges and medical condition of the accused.

Analysis:
The appeal was filed against the High Court's order denying bail to the appellant, who was accused No. 5 in a criminal case involving serious charges under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. The appellant, aged 63, had already spent three years in jail and was suffering from a cardiac condition requiring immediate surgery. The defense argued that other co-accused had been granted bail earlier, and the investigation was complete with the charge sheet filed. On the contrary, the prosecution contended that the appellant was influential and could tamper with witnesses, highlighting his past absconding and alleged attempts to mislead the investigation. The Court noted the contentions of both parties and refrained from expressing any opinion on the case's merits due to the ongoing trial.

Regarding the bail application, the Court observed that the appellant was similarly situated with other accused who had been granted bail. Considering the medical reports and the appellant's health condition, the Court was inclined to grant bail but imposed restrictions to address the prosecution's concerns. The appellant was directed to stay away from the crime scene, surrender his passport, and undergo medical treatment in Pune. Additionally, he was ordered to report to the local police station weekly and the C.B.I. was authorized to monitor his activities during the bail period. The Court empowered the C.B.I. to seek bail cancellation if the appellant interfered with witnesses or the investigation. The appeal was disposed of with these directions, emphasizing the importance of complying with the conditions set by the trial Court.

This judgment illustrates the delicate balance between granting bail to an accused based on medical grounds and ensuring that the legal process is not obstructed. The Court's decision to release the appellant on bail with stringent conditions reflects a nuanced approach aimed at safeguarding both the accused's health needs and the integrity of the ongoing criminal proceedings.