On bail, SC sets a precedent
In cancelling Ashish Mishra’s bail, it upholds victims’ rights. Lower courts must take note
Does the victim of an alleged crime have the right to be heard at the stage of granting bail to the accused in the case? And, do courts need to go into the merits of the arguments of a particular case while hearing bail applications? The Supreme Court addressed these questions conclusively on Monday in its judgment cancelling the bail given to Ashish Mishra, the son of junior Union home minister, Ajay Mishra Teni, and the prime accused in the 2021 Lakhimpur Kheri violence case, by the Allahabad High Court (HC) in February.
A three-judge bench headed by Chief Justice of India (CJI) NV Ramana held that the HC overstepped its jurisdiction in granting bail to Mishra, who is accused of attempt to murder for allegedly running over four farmers and a journalist in October 2021 in the Uttar Pradesh district. The court recorded its “disappointment” with the way the HC failed to acknowledge the rights of victims. It used international jurisprudence and prior verdicts of Indian courts to establish that victims must be accorded a “fair and effective” hearing. In sum, it held that victims of an alleged crime must be heard during bail hearings. This will have far-reaching consequences on bail jurisprudence in a country where the norm in the recent past has become jail, not bail, and where the apex court has repeatedly stressed on the need to change mindsets around granting bail. Second, the top court held that the HC lost sight of relevant considerations in the case when it delved into examining the evidence on merits and the sequence of events in the First Information Report (FIR). And third, the bench was of the opinion that the HC showed undue haste in deciding the bail application without giving adequate opportunity to the other parties to argue their case – namely that Mishra was very powerful and his influence in the area would have a chilling effect on eyewitnesses and the investigation in the case.
In recent years, the apex court has repeatedly stressed on the importance of ensuring the personal liberty of people, and told the lower courts to not hesitate in granting bail to accused persons, if all conditions are fulfilled. In Thursday’s order, the court recognised the legitimacy of seeking liberty from incarceration and observed that no accused person could be subjected to unending detention, pending trial. Its delineation of victims’ rights adds to the guidelines on bail laid down by the top court in separate judgments last year. It’s now up to the subordinate judiciary to put this into practice.