The Supreme Court ruled that the bail applications whether Pre-arrest bail or Post-arrest bail must be decided expeditiously.
The petition came to be filed assailing the order where the High Court while dealing with an application seeking anticipatory bail dismissed the interim relief prayed for by the petitioner and while admitting the bail petition posted the matter for final hearing in due course.
The division bench of Justice Ajay Rastogi and Justice B.V. Nagarathna said that ordinarily, the Court where there is refusal to grant interim relief is not inclined to interfere but this is somewhat peculiar facts brought to the notice of the Court where the applicant who approached for seeking anticipatory bail the Judge of the High Court while admitting the bail petition dismissed the interim relief and posted the matter for hearing in due course.
The court stated that this is an unusual practice and which the Court has never come across. Earlier also, this practice being followed in the High Court of Chhattisgarh was deprecated by the Court in SLP.
The bench disapproved of such practice and requested the Chief Justice of the High Court to take a judicial note and at least the bail applications whether it is pre-arrest bail or post-arrest bail (under Section 438 or 439 of the Code) must be decided as expeditiously as possible.
The court said that it is not supposed to give any guidelines for the disposal of the bail applications but at the same time it always expects that bail applications must be decided as expeditiously as possible and not to be posted in due course of time.
The bench noted that after the interim order was passed by the Court in the present petition, the anticipatory bail has been granted to the petitioner.
The court dismissed the petition.
Case title: Tulsi Ram Sahu v/s The State of Chhattisgarh
Citation: Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 2564/2022