Bail Rules Updated: SC on Kusha Duruka case

The Kusha Duruka vs. State of Odisha case was a bail application heard by the Supreme Court of India in January 2024. 

Background:

• Kusha Duruka was accused in a criminal case in Odisha and had been denied bail by the Orissa High Court.

• She then filed a petition in the Supreme Court challenging the High Court's decision.

Key Points:

• The Supreme Court did not rule on the specific issue of Kusha Duruka's bail, as she had already been granted bail by the High Court during the pendency of the petition.

• However, the Court laid down important guidelines for future bail applications. 

• These guidelines are:-

• Mentioning details of previous bail applications made in the same case.

• Listing all bail applications for different accused in the same FIR before the same Judge.

• Maintaining a report system for pending and decided bail applications.

• Emphasizing the duty of both the parties and the court to conduct themselves honestly and efficiently.

Detailed Explanation:

The Supreme Court, in response to a case where the Odisha high court granted bail to Kusha Duruka under the NDPS Act while his appeal was pending in the Supreme Court, has issued comprehensive directives regarding bail applications. The court emphasized the importance of litigants not misleading the court by suppressing facts. The specific incident prompted the court to stress the need for full disclosure in bail applications.

According to the court's directions, litigants seeking bail are now mandated to provide detailed information about any previous bail applications, including copies of orders.

Additionally, they must inform the court about any ongoing proceedings related to their case.

This decision reflects the court's concern about the decline in moral values within the legal system, with a particular emphasis on the integral role of truth in the justice-delivery process.

The court expressed its dissatisfaction with the current state of affairs, noting that materialism has overshadowed traditional values, leading to a disregard for truth in litigation.

The justices observed that these directions are aimed at streamlining the legal process, preventing anomalies in bail applications during pending trials, and ensuring transparency in court proceedings.

Furthermore, the court outlined a systematic approach, directing the registry of the court where the bail application is filed to report on decided or pending bail applications related to the specific crime case. This approach is intended to facilitate a clear understanding of the context in which bail applications are made.

The court's decision also highlighted the role of Investigating Officers and lawyers in the proceedings. Investigating Officers are now duty-bound to apprise the court of past orders, bail applications, or other relevant proceedings in the same crime case. Lawyers, in turn, are expected to conduct themselves as officers of the court, reinforcing the idea that truth and transparency are essential components of the justice system.

Significance:

• The case is significant because it establishes important procedural guidelines for handling bail applications in India.

• These guidelines aim to ensure transparency, prevent inconsistencies, and promote fair and efficient administration of justice.

• the Supreme Court's directives seek to address issues of deception, suppression of facts, and the need for transparency in bail applications, ultimately aiming to uphold the integrity of the justice-delivery system.

Basics:

Bail is a legal process that allows an accused person to be released from custody before their trial. It involves the payment of money or the provision of collateral as a guarantee that the person will appear in court as required. The purpose of bail is to balance the right of the accused to freedom with the interest of ensuring their appearance in court.

If the accused fails to appear, they may forfeit the bail amount or face additional legal consequences.

The specific procedures and types of bail can vary based on jurisdiction and legal systems.

In India, bail procedures and types may vary based on the legal provisions and jurisdiction. However, the common types of bail available include:

1. Regular Bail: This is the standard bail granted by the court during the trial proceedings.

2. Anticipatory Bail: Granted in anticipation of arrest, providing protection to the accused from being arrested for a specific period.

3. Interim Bail: Granted temporarily, often during the pendency of the trial, and may be for a short duration.

4. Personal Bond: Similar to Release on Recognizance, where the accused is released based on a promise without any monetary deposit.

5. Surety Bail: Involves a third party, known as a surety, who guarantees the accused person's appearance in court.

6. Cash Bail: The accused pays a specific amount of money to secure their release.

The type of bail and its conditions can vary depending on factors such as the nature of the offense, the accused's criminal history, and the discretion of the court.

Read more:https://www.instagram.com/p/CfIl1P-vzAU/?igsh=MXByODNzczVkcGFkOQ==

Thanks for visiting!!