HIMANSHU SHARMA V. UNION OF INDIA, CITATION: 2024 (SC) 157
FACTS:
The appellants herein were arrested in connection with the FIR being Crime No. 21/2022 registered at P.S. Dinara District, Shivpuri for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 470 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1960 (hereinafter being referred to as ‘IPC’) and Section 25/27 of the Arms Act. the appellants herein were not apprehended at the time of registration of the FIR and were not named therein. They were implicated in the case solely on the basis of confessional statements made by the co accused persons. Charge sheet had been filed by the time the appellants were granted bail. The State preferred applications under Section 439(2) CrPC seeking cancellation of regular bail granted to the appellants herein.
ISSUE:
Whether bail granted by one bench can be cancelled by another bench?
OBSERVATION:
Supreme Court observed that the exercise of jurisdiction by the Single Judge of the High Court in cancelling the bail granted to the accused by another Single Judge of the same High Court and that too, by examining the merits of the allegations tantamount, to judicial impropriety/indiscipline. The Supreme Court expressed displeasure with the conduct of the Single Judge of the Madhya Pradesh High Court who cancelled the bail as already granted to the accused by another Single Judge of the same High Court. The Supreme Court observed that the act of reviewing the orders granting bail to the accused by another Single Judge is uncalled for and amounts to gross impropriety.
