SHABBIR-UL-HASSAN vs SYED ZAHID HUSSAIN and another
This criminal miscellaneous application was filed to seek the cancellation of bail previously granted to the respondent/accused. The core legal question before the High Court was whether the existence of an alleged extra-judicial confession, made before a police official and a prosecution witness, constituted sufficient grounds to warrant the cancellation of bail that had already been granted by the trial court. The High Court dismissed the application in limine, holding that there were no compelling reasons to cancel the bail at this stage. The court emphasized the settled legal principle that once bail is granted, it cannot be cancelled based on evidence that has yet to be properly appraised by the trial court during the final adjudication. The court affirmed that very strong circumstances are required to justify the cancellation of bail. While dismissing the application, the court clarified that the trial court retains the liberty to cancel the bail if, during the course of the proceedings, strong evidence emerges on the record that necessitates such a measure.
- Can bail be cancelled based on an extra-judicial confession before the evidence has been appraised by the trial court?
- What is the threshold for cancelling bail once it has been granted to an accused?
- Does the trial court retain the authority to cancel bail if strong evidence emerges during the trial?
ORDER
1. Heard learned counsel for the parties.
2. The respondent/accused was admitted to bail in this, bail application vide order dated 8th November, 2006 on the basis of the deposition of Mst, Shahana recorded by the trial Court, and further observation was recorded for not expressing any observation on the evidence recorded by the trial Court, which was likely to effect the final decision of the learned trial Court.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has relied upon the extrajudicial confessional statement allegedly made by the accused/ Respondent No, 1 before a police official and before P.W. Shabbir- ulHassan.
4. The question to be resolved by the trial Court would be as to whether, under the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, the extra-judicial confessional statement of the accused/Respondent No, 1 would suffice for arriving at a definite conclusion of the offence having been committed at his hands. It is a settled principles of law that once an accused is admitted to bail, then very strong circumstances need, for the purpose of cancellation, of such order of grant of bail, and that the same cannot be directed on the basis of evidence which is yet to be said properly appraised by the trial Court itself at the conclusion of the trial.
5. There is no reason for directing to cancel the bail granted to accused/Respondent No, 1 and therefore, this criminal miscellaneous application is hereby dismissed in limine together with the listed application; however, the trial Court shall be at liberty to direct for cancellation of bail of the accused as and when strong evidence comes on the record of the case, for all such purposes as