CONCEPT OF SUCCESSIVE BAIL APPLICATION

Abstract:

The term “bail” is a security given by the charged that he will show up some time recently the
court for replying the allegations that have been made against him and incorporate individual
bonds and safeguard bonds. An arrested individual is trusted to his sureties upon their security
that the said individual would show up at the assigned put and time, to the jurisdiction of the
court. The sureties to whom the captured individual is conveyed ended up the bailer as they are
responsible for his presence when required. An individual is safeguarded on the bond given by
the sureties and the surety must have a specialist to safeguard the arrested individual.

Key words: Bailable offence, Non-bailable offence, Successive bail application, adequate
sureties, interface of equity, Discharge from custody, sufficient sureties.

Classification:

There are two types of offences under Section 2(a) of CrPC: Bailable and Non-bailable:

 Bailable offence: According to Section 2(a), an offense which is appeared within the First
Schedule of CrPC as bailable, or which is made bail able by any other law in drive would be
a bailable offense. First Schedule consists of two parts: the primary portion relates to offenses
under the Indian Penal Code and the second portion deals with offenses under other laws.
The moment portion says that offenses that are culpable for less than three a long time or
with fine as it were are bailable offenses. A few illustrations of it would be bribery or open
disturbance etc. In this sort of offense, bail can be claimed as a matter of right, as they are
less serious.

 Non-bailable offence: According to Section 2(a), any offense which isn't included within the
First Schedule as a bailable offense is non-bailable offence. The offences guilty of death, life

1|Page
 imprisonment or incarceration for more than seven years are classified as crimes under the
second section of the First Schedule. In this sort of offense, an individual cannot be bailed as
a matter of right but can ask the court to allow bail. The discretion is vested with the court to
give bail or not, subject to the conditions specified in Section 437.

Successive bail application:

Provisions are well known that an accused has the right to make successive bail applications, but
in the modified conditions successive bail applications are fair. It must be significant to adjust the
conditions that have a concerted impact on the prior option and not just superficial modifications
that have little to no consequence. Without the change in the conditions, the consequent bail
appeal will be deemed to be seeking audit of the previous order of refusal which is not acceptable
under criminal law. When accepting such substantive bail applications, the Court has a
responsibility to consider the reasons and grounds for which the earlier bail applications have
been refused and what are the fresh grounds that affect it once again to support the determination
and evaluation of the bail application and to include a view that is distinct from that held in the
previous applications.

Conditions to grant to bail:

Under Section 437(3), certain conditions are imposed by the court whereas allowing bail where
the charged is punished with imprisonment of more than seven years, or abetment, conspiracy, or
endeavour to commit any such offence:

 That such individual shall act, according to the conditions of the bond.
 That such individual might not commit an offense comparative to the one he is charged
off.
 That such individual might initiate any other individual to not disclose the realities with
respect to the case, or alter with the evidence. Other conditions may moreover be imposed
within the interface of equity.

2|Page
  Provisions pursuant to Section 437, section 3 may be imposed as if the bail had been
issued under that provision.

Provisions regarding bond of accused and sureties:

 Amount of bond and reduction:

Under Section 440, after proper consideration of the circumstances of the case, the amount of
each bail bond executed under this chapter should be determined and the bond should not in any
way, be unreasonable. The High Court or Court of Session also has the authority to arrange the
bail issued by a police officer or a magistrate to be cut down.

 Condition and execution of bonds:

Section 441 deals with the provision relating to the condition and execution of a bail bond.
Before discharging an individual on bail or on his possess bond, a bond must be executed by that
individual, and such bond should be agreeing to the police officer or court, as they think fit. Also,
in the event that the individual is discharged on bail where a bond has been given by one or more
adequate sureties, it must be made sure by the sureties that such individual shall attend according
to the time and place specified in the bond and might continue unless something else inquired by
a police officer or the court. If any other condition is to be forced for the discharge of the
individual, such condition shall also be there within the bond. Such a bond may too require the
discharged individual to seem some time recently the High Court, Court of Session or other
courts for replying the charge. For checking that the sureties are fit, the court may require them to
record the affirmations for such wellness and adequacy, and may too arrange an request itself or
by the officer to check their wellness or adequacy.

 Declaration of bond:

As per Section 441A, each individual acting as surety for the charged must pronounce before the
court the number of people to whom he has stood as security including the charged and should
provide therein all the significant particulars.

3|Page
 Discharge from custody:

Section 442 deals with release from custody. It says that as soon as a bond is executed for
discharge of the individual, such individual might be discharged, and on the off chance that he is
in imprison, at that point the court in which the bond was executed should coordinate the police
officer of that imprison to discharge the individual, and the police officer may do so on getting
the receipt of that arrange.

 Sufficiency of sureties and discharge of sureties:

According to Section 443, if a person serving as a defence is inadequate or is consequently

Section 444 deals with promise release. It says that any of the promises or joint guarantees can, at
any time, appeal to a Magistrate for the presence or attendance of a person to discharge their
bond solely or in relation to the claimant.

Upon such proposal, the Magistrate shall appoint such a person to be arrested and brought before
the court, and shall direct the bond to be disposed on the man's appearance in so much as it
relates to the claimant, and shall ask the applicant to find a further sufficient security or security
and, if he fails to do so, may impose him in prison.

 Bond in case of Minor:

Section 448 speaks about the bond a minor deserves. Where the person to be freed is a minor, the
bond can only be enforced by a probation or security. A minor cannot himself have a warrant
imposed for his freedom.

4|Page
Land mark Judgements:

 Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar:1

A petition of habeas corpus was recorded with respect to the administration of jails within the
State of Bihar. It was found that a huge number of detainees counting men, ladies, and children
were put behind bars for a long time, anticipating their trial. Numerous of those detainees had
committed offenses, for which they would have been given punishment not more than some
months or in a few cases, two years, but they were behind imprison for three to ten a long time
which as well without any trial.

Here the court needed the prompt discharge of those detainees. Court said that fairness under
Article 21 is impeded where an individual isn't given a fast trial, where an individual is not given
pre-trial ought to be discharged on bail on an individual bond, where the individual charged is
poor and there are no chances of him to steal away, where a individual has been kept under trial
for a time more prominent than the discipline he would have been granted, where he isn't given
free legitimate help, and where he is as well destitute to engage a lawyer, provided that the
attorney given by the state isn't protested by him. Court inquired to require the taking after
components for ascertaining his roots within the community: His length of home within the
community. His work status, history, and money related condition. His family ties and notoriety
within the community. His earlier criminal record. The nature of offense committed, the clear
likelihood of conviction and the likely sentence.

 Moti Ram v. State of Madhya Pradesh:2

In this case, a destitute mason was convicted. The apex court alluded the matter to Chief Judicial
Magistrate (CJM) to discharge him on bail, without making any details as to sureties, bonds etc.

The CJM settled Rs.10, 000 as surety and bond and along these lines denied to permit his brother
to become surety as his property was within the adjoining town. The applicant challenged it to
the apex court. Justice Krishna Iyer criticized the activities of the judge and said that the courts
1
1979 AIR 1369
2
1978 AIR 1594

5|Page
ought to be slanted to bail, not imprison. The court said that the charged cannot be inquired to
outfit surety from the same district where the offense is being attempted. Court encourage
emphasized that bail can be given on individual bonds, as well as on sureties bond; the court
shall too be beyond any doubt the condition of the individual whereas settling the sum of the
bond. And where a poor individual is included, the court ought to be liberal in discharging them
within the individual recognizance.

 M/s Gati Limited v. T. Nagarajan Piramiajee & Another:

In a fresh and most recent improvement, the Supreme Court on May 6, 2019 has in a latest,
landmark and praiseworthy judgment titled M/s Gati Constrained v. T. Nagarajan Piramiajee &
Another, In Criminal Offer No. 870 of 2019 [Emerging out of SLP (Cri.) No. 6677 of 2018]
emphasized because it has a few times within the past that successive bail applications recorded
by an accused ought to be set before the same Judge who had denied bail within the first
instance, unless that Judge is not accessible. If that Judge isn't accessible who had refused bail at
the primary instance then it can be set some time recently a few distinctive Judge. Both the
prosecutors conjointly all the Judges must continuously keep this key point in intellect on such
cases. There can be no denying or debating it.

This vital, most recent and praiseworthy decision makes it perfectly clear that successive bail
applications should be put before the same judge who found the first. Numerous case laws were
cited in this striking judgment to support this consistent point of view which has already been
considered in comprehensive detail in the above para. It is only when the Judge either leaves or is
exchanged or isn't accessible for a few other reason that the bail application can be set before a
few other Judge. All courts and all Judges must continuously strictly follow to what has been laid
down in this point of interest stated by Supreme Court so explicitly and so elegantly.

Conclusion:

It is clear that the main intention of providing bail is not to free a prisoner but to make sure the
person remains for the trial. Often the rule is implemented to restrict a person's personal rights

6|Page
and to ensure that no false lawsuit is made. That's not an inherent right, though, but subject to
different restrictions.

References:

 www.legalservicesindia.com
 www.manupatra.com
 www.researchgate.com
 www.westlawindia.com
 www.lawjournalindia.com

 https://www.lawyersnjurists.com/article/general-study-bail-crpc-laws/
 https://lawtimesjournal.in/anticipatory-bail/
 https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/articles/The-basic-rules-for-grant-or-denial-of-bail-under-
CrPC-8996.asp.
 https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/supreme-court-grants-bail-to-
chidambaram-in-inx-media-case/articleshow/72359875.cms

7|Page