By Scptilast Updated

Copyright indiatimes

The Supreme Court has observed while protection of individual liberty was important, courts must not turn a “blind eye” to the suffering of the victims. Justices Vikram Nath and Sandeep Mehta, therefore, set aside a March 2024 order of the Patna High Court that granted anticipatory bail to two accused in a murder case. The top court expressed a “sincere concern” with the haste with which the high court dealt with the matter. “While the scheme of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (now Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023) provides concurrent jurisdiction to the high court and sessions court for entertaining applications for anticipatory bail, this court has time and again observed that high court should always encourage exhausting an alternative/concurrent remedy before directly interfering itself,” the bench said. The approach, the top court said, balances the interests of all stakeholders, first by giving the aggrieved party a round of challenge before the high court.Live Events The bench said this approach also provides the high court an opportunity to assess the judicial perspective so applied by the sessions court, in concurrent jurisdiction, instead of independently applying its mind from the first go. The high court failed to record any reason for directly granting anticipatory bail without impleading the complainant as a party, it added. “While the protection of individual liberty is important, courts must not turn a blind eye to the suffering of the victims. A balance has to be struck to protect the individual liberty of the accused as well as to secure an environment that is free from any fear in the hearts of victim of the alleged perpetrators,” the bench said. The September 17 order further said though grant of bail was a discretionary exercise, courts must be cautious to exercise this discretion judiciously. “In the present case, this discretion was totally uncalled for especially at the stage of anticipatory bail,” it said. The bench said the high court had not fairly appreciated the gravity of accusations levelled against the accused. “We, therefore, are unable to understand what prompted the high court to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-respondents in such a heinous offence,” it said. The bench noted the murder of the complainant’s wife was committed in broad daylight. The top court was acting on the appeal filed by the complainant challenging the high court’s order granting anticipatory bail to the two accused in an FIR lodged in December 2023.Add as a Reliable and Trusted News Source Add Now!
The bench directed the accused to surrender within four weeks and apply for regular bail.(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)

Read More News onSupreme Courtprotection of libertyvictim sufferinganticipatory bailhigh courtPatna High Courtvikram nathbharatiya nagarik suraksha sanhitasandeep mehtaCriminal Procedure Code

(Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.) Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online….moreless

(You can now subscribe to our Economic Times WhatsApp channel)Read More News onSupreme Courtprotection of libertyvictim sufferinganticipatory bailhigh courtPatna High Courtvikram nathbharatiya nagarik suraksha sanhitasandeep mehtaCriminal Procedure Code(Catch all the Business News, Breaking News, Budget 2025 Events and Latest News Updates on The Economic Times.) Subscribe to The Economic Times Prime and read the ET ePaper online….moreless

Prime ExclusivesInvestment IdeasStock Report PlusePaperWealth Edition123View all Stories