NEW DELHI: Supreme Court Thursday said courts should not stay bail order in a “casual” manner as it affects liberty of a person and took exception to the Delhi HC keeping a bail order stayed for over a year during which the accused remained in jail.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih expressed shock that the HC stayed the trial court order granting bail to an accused in a money laundering case and kept the case pending for a year which forced the accused to approach the SC.”What is happening? This is shocking. Please answer our question. Can bail be stayed as a matter of course? Unless he is a terrorist, where is the reason to stay? Can you defend? We will set it aside… how HC casually stayed the bail. Could HC have stayed without a reasoned order? Answer us, what signals are we sending? We are blaming us also,” it told ED counsel Zoheb Hossain. The bench said such a practice could not be allowed as it was about liberty. “The HC passed the order in a very casual manner. It stayed the bail order and the case was thereafter heard after one year. The court did not bother to look into the case during the period and he kept languishing in jail,” it said. The bench reserved its order but Hossain urged the court to grant him at least 10 minutes on Friday to argue the case on behalf of ED as any order passed by the apex court would have ramifications in other cases too. He said the prosecution was not at fault for the delay.
Worried about liberty aspect: SC on bail case
We are worried about the liberty aspect. A person has to languish for one year in jail after bail was granted, the bench said, allowing Hossain to place case laws before the bench on the issue.
The court was hearing a plea filed by one Parvinder Khurana who was granted bail by the trial court in a PMLA case on June 17 last year but the HC stayed the order. The SC on June 7 stayed the HC order and restored Khurana’s bail.
A bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Augustine George Masih expressed shock that the HC stayed the trial court order granting bail to an accused in a money laundering case and kept the case pending for a year which forced the accused to approach the SC.”What is happening? This is shocking. Please answer our question. Can bail be stayed as a matter of course? Unless he is a terrorist, where is the reason to stay? Can you defend? We will set it aside… how HC casually stayed the bail. Could HC have stayed without a reasoned order? Answer us, what signals are we sending? We are blaming us also,” it told ED counsel Zoheb Hossain. The bench said such a practice could not be allowed as it was about liberty. “The HC passed the order in a very casual manner. It stayed the bail order and the case was thereafter heard after one year. The court did not bother to look into the case during the period and he kept languishing in jail,” it said. The bench reserved its order but Hossain urged the court to grant him at least 10 minutes on Friday to argue the case on behalf of ED as any order passed by the apex court would have ramifications in other cases too. He said the prosecution was not at fault for the delay.
Worried about liberty aspect: SC on bail case
We are worried about the liberty aspect. A person has to languish for one year in jail after bail was granted, the bench said, allowing Hossain to place case laws before the bench on the issue.
The court was hearing a plea filed by one Parvinder Khurana who was granted bail by the trial court in a PMLA case on June 17 last year but the HC stayed the order. The SC on June 7 stayed the HC order and restored Khurana’s bail.
