Verify pendency of bail pleas, Punjab and Haryana High Court tells subordinate judiciary
Saurabh Malik
Chandigarh, March 15
In a significant judgment liable to change the way regular and anticipatory bail applications are adjudicated by subordinate judiciary, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it mandatory for the courts in Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh, to verify whether the pleas before them were decided or pending before the High Court as well.
In all, Justice Jasgurpreet Singh Puri issued five commandments to the Sessions Judges of Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh after taking cognisance of the practice among the litigants to file parallel bail applications before both the High Court and the lower courts without disclosing the fact.
The commandments are significant as the trial court can pass one order and the High Court another on the bail application by an accused in the same case. In any case, the subordinate court cannot entertain a plea when the same is pending before a superior court.
Justice Puri asserted all the Sessions Judges would ensure that the “Ahlmads” verified from the High Court’s official website whether a bail application submitted in their sessions division by an applicant was decided or pending before the High Court. The “Ahlmads” would also verify the status of the bail applications.
Justice Puri added a report would be placed on the case file for the perusal of the court concerned after carrying out the verification. “It must be mandatorily mentioned in every application for bail, both regular and anticipatory, as to whether such or similar application for bail has or has not been made before any other court. In case the same was made, then its status be also mentioned”.
Justice Puri also asked the Directors-Prosecution of Punjab, Haryana and Chandigarh, to inform the public prosecutors that they would be duty bound to supply necessary information to the court concerned regarding the pendency or decision of any earlier bail application of an accused in the same offence after taking information from the investigating officer/police official concerned. “The instructions issued by this court from time to time be complied with meticulously,” Justice Puri added.
The Bench also “highly disapproved” and “deprecated” the conduct of three different petitioners in filing bail application before the Additional Sessions Judges without disclosing the pendency of pleas before the High Court.
Justice Puri added it was the solemn duty of the petitioners or their counsels to disclose the fact to the Additional Sessions Judge with “truthfulness and honesty as these two elements are sacrosanct for imbibing purity in the administration of justice”.
Justice Puri also directed the forwarding of the copy to all the District and Sessions Judges and the Directors-Prosecution. The court also recorded appreciation for amicus curiae-senior advocates Kanwaljit Singh and RS Rai and Legal Researcher Shiny Chopra.
