May 08, 2018
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir in a case (Bhushan Kumar & anr. v. State & Ors.) recently expounded the law relating to criteria for cancellation of bail that has already been granted and criteria for refusal of bail. The Court categorically stated that the two situations are entirely different.
Grant of bail in a non-bailable offence is discretion of a court but this discretionary jurisdiction is to be exercised in judicious manner by applying sound judicial principles, which by now are well settled. Court can refuse bail in non-bailable offences if in the opinion of the court a case for granting bail is not made out, having regard to the factors, which are well laid down and need not be stated here.
Refusal of Bail- Reference was made to the case of Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, wherein the Apex Court with reference to refusal of bail observed that the society has a vital interest in grant or refusal of bail because every criminal offence is the offence against the State. The order granting or refusing bail must reflect perfect balance between the conflicting interests, namely sanctity of individual liberty and the interest of the society. The Law of bails dovetails two conflicting interests namely on the one hand, the requirement of shielding the society from the hazards of those committing crimes and potentiality of repeating the same crime while on bail and on the other hand absolute adherence of the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence regarding presumption of innocence of an accused until he is found guilty and the sanctity of individual liberty.
The Court observed that bail, interim or final, once granted, can be cancelled only if a case for cancellation is made out having regard to the factors, which are certainly other than those to be considered for the purpose of grant/refusal of bail.
Reference was also made to Apex Court’s verdict in the case of Daulat Ram v. The State of Haryana, wherein the Court expounded on the factors to be taken into consideration while ordering cancellation of bail and held:
“Rejection of bail in a non bailable case at the initial stage and the cancellation of bail already granted, have to be considered and dealt with on different basis. Very cogent and overwhelming circumstances are necessary for an order directing the cancellation of the bail, already granted. Generally speaking, the ground for cancellation of bail, broadly (illustrative and no exhaustive) are: interference or attempt to interfere with the due course of administration of justice or evasion or attempt to evade the due course of justice or abuse of the concession granted to the accused in any manner. The satisfaction of the Court, on the basis of material placed on the record or the possibility of the accused absconding is yet another reason justifying the cancellation of bail”.
 (2010) 8 Supreme 353
 (1995) 1 SCC