Bail Once Granted Cannot be Cancelled by Mere Asking: Karnataka High Court
The Karnataka Excessive Court docket held that bail as soon as granted can’t be cancelled only for asking as within the absence of any such energy being vested within the larger Courts both beneath Part 483(3) of BNSS, 2023 or another provision of BNSS, 2023 and no such energy being carved out within the POCSO Act as effectively.
A grievance was registered by the Petitioner (mom of sufferer woman) for the offence of rape, kidnapping of a minor woman, wherein bail was granted to the accused. A petition was filed looking for cancellation of bail.
The Bench of Justice V. Srishananda noticed, “Within the absence of any such energy being vested within the larger Courts both beneath Part 483(3) of BNSS, 2023 or another provision of BNSS, 2023 and no such energy being carved out within the POCSO Act as effectively, this Court docket is of the thought of opinion that bail as soon as granted can’t be cancelled only for asking.“
Advocate Sanjay A. Patil represented the Petitioner, the Advocates Arati Patil and Ashok B. Mulage represented the Respondents.
Case Temporary
The Petitioner sought cancellation of bail of the accused on numerous grounds and contended that petition is maintainable having regard to the truth that cancellation of bail is permissible both earlier than the Court docket, which granted bail or earlier than this Court docket having regard to the concurrent energy vested by the statue.
Nevertheless, the State contended that the order of granting bail is a discretionary order and within the absence of any compelling circumstances, bail as soon as granted can’t be cancelled.
Court docket’s Evaluation
The Court docket opined that as a common rule, software looking for cancellation of the bail is to be filed earlier than the Court docket, which granted bail, inasmuch as, it’s that Court docket which is unique data of info for grant of bail or rejection.
The Bench noticed, “Part 483(3) of BNSS, 2023 is retained in verbatim of Part 439(2) of Cr.P.C. If in any respect the legislature is of the opinion that even in case of a discretionary order, if no correct discretion is exercised by a Court docket, then such orders may be subject material of both revision or enchantment, essentially the legislature would have carved out such energy within the larger Courts particularly, the Excessive Court docket as in opposition to the Classes Court docket or the Particular Court docket.“
The Court docket additional added that if there’s a grave and critical error that has been dedicated by the Court docket whereas granting the bail, similar might be questioned beneath the supervisory energy beneath Article 227 of the Structure of India and by invoking inherent energy of this Court docket beneath Part 482 of Cr.P.C.
The Court docket held that the Petition isn’t maintainable.
Accordingly, the Petition was dismissed.
Trigger Title: Devibhai V. The State of Karnataka (Impartial Quotation: 2025:KHC-Ok:3332)
