Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

"4. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant/appellant as well as learned Additional Advocate General and have also gone through the material available on record.
5. In Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & another, (2022) 10 Supreme Court Cases 51, after taking note of the provisions of Section 436A, Cr.P.C., the Hon'ble Apex Court held as under:-
"63. Section 436A of the Code has been inserted by Act 25 of 2005. This provision has got a laudable object behind it, particularly from the point of view of granting bail. This provision draws the maximum period for which an undertrial prisoner can be ( 2025:HHC:2309 ) detained. This period has to be reckoned with the custody of the accused during the investigation, inquiry and trial. We have already explained that the word 'trial' will have to be given an expanded meaning particularly when an appeal or admission is pending. Thus, in a case where an appeal is pending for a longer time, to bring it under Section 436A, the period of incarceration in all forms will have to be reckoned, and so also for the revision. 64. Under this provision, when a person has undergone detention for a period extending to one-half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for that offense, he shall be released by the court on his personal bond with or without sureties. The word 'shall' clearly denotes the mandatory compliance of this provision. We do feel that there is not even a need for a bail application in a case of this nature particularly when the reasons for delay are not attributable against the accused. We are also conscious of the fact that while taking a decision the public prosecutor is to be heard, and the court, if it is of the view that there is a need for continued detention longer than one-half of the said period, has to do so. However, such an exercise of power is expected to be undertaken sparingly being an exception to the general rule. Once again, we have to reiterate that 'bail is the rule and jail is an exception' coupled with the principle governing the presumption of innocence. We have no doubt in our mind that this provision is a substantive one, facilitating liberty, being the core intendment of Article
8. Similarly, an appeal or revision shall also be construed as a facet of trial when it comes to the consideration of bail on suspension of sentence."

10. It further held that the power under Section 389 of Cr.P.C. (now substituted by Section 430 of BNSS) is different from Sections 438 or 439 (now substituted by ( 2025:HHC:2309 ) Sections 482 and 483 of BNSS) of the Code, the delay in taking up the main appeal would be a factor under Section 436A of Cr.P.C.(now substituted by Section 479 of BNSS), but the Court will have to see other relevant factors, including the conviction rendered by the learned Trial Court. It was observed at page 113: