Bail Not Punishment, Supreme Court Reminds Judiciary
In a stern rebuke, the Supreme Court of India has lamented that High Courts and Trial Courts have forgotten that bail is not meant to be used as punishment. The apex court’s remarks come as a response to the growing trend of lower courts denying bail to accused individuals, often resulting in prolonged incarceration and undue hardship.
“Bail is the Rule, Jail is the Exception”
The Supreme Court’s observation is a timely reminder of the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence, which emphasizes that bail is the rule, and jail is the exception. The court’s remarks are aimed at sensitizing lower courts to the importance of granting bail, especially in cases where the accused is not a flight risk or a danger to society.
Also Read Mumbai Court Imposes Hefty Fine on Man for Killing Dog
The Supreme Court’s concern is not unfounded. In recent years, there has been a growing trend of lower courts denying bail, often citing vague reasons or relying on flimsy grounds. This has resulted in many accused individuals languishing in jail for extended periods, even before their guilt is established.
The consequences of such an approach are far-reaching, often resulting in the loss of livelihood, damage to reputation, and undue hardship to the accused and their families.
The Supreme Court’s rebuke is a timely reminder to lower courts to exercise their discretion judiciously and to prioritize the grant of bail, especially in cases where the accused is not a threat to society. By doing so, the apex court has reiterated the importance of upholding the principles of justice, fairness, and human rights in the administration of criminal justice.
In this article, we will explore the implications of the Supreme Court’s observations and examine the legal framework governing bail in India. We will also discuss the consequences of denying bail and the need for lower courts to exercise their discretion judiciously.