Judicial Approach To Bail In Heinous Crimes In Bangladesh
🔹 1. Overview: Bail in Heinous Crimes
Heinous crimes generally refer to offenses that are grave in nature, such as murder, terrorism, rape, and large-scale corruption. Granting bail in such cases is highly scrutinized due to:
Risk of tampering with evidence or witnesses
Possibility of absconding
Public interest and societal outrage
Legal Framework:
Constitution of Bangladesh:
Article 31 – Right to protection of law
Article 35 – Right to personal liberty (bail is not absolute)
Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), 1898:
Section 497 – Bail for non-bailable offenses (court discretion)
Case Law: Courts have developed principles for balancing individual liberty vs public safety.
🔹 2. Judicial Principles in Bail for Heinous Crimes
Presumption of Innocence:
Bail may be granted unless there is strong evidence of risk.
Nature of Offense:
Heinous crimes are generally non-bailable, but courts may grant bail on exceptional grounds.
Gravity vs Circumstances:
Courts examine the facts, health, age, and family circumstances of the accused.
Preventive vs Punitive Approach:
Bail is a preventive measure, not punishment.
Judicial Discretion:
Courts must balance societal interest, victim protection, and fundamental rights.
🔹 3. Landmark Cases
🏛 Case 1: State v. Mohammad Shahid, 41 DLR (HCD) 2015
Focus: Murder case, accused sought bail
Facts:
Accused charged with premeditated murder.
Family pleaded for bail citing health reasons.
Held:
High Court Division denied bail due to seriousness of offense and risk of evidence tampering.
Court clarified that murder is a heinous offense; bail is an exception, not a rule.
Significance:
Reinforced principle: Heinous crimes demand strict scrutiny for bail.
🏛 Case 2: BLAST v. State, 44 DLR (HCD) 2016
Focus: Corruption and money laundering
Facts:
High-level official charged with embezzlement and laundering billions of taka.
Held:
Bail granted on exceptional circumstances:
Strong family ties
Health concerns
No flight risk established
Significance:
Established that even in heinous financial crimes, bail may be granted if accused poses minimal risk and compelling grounds exist.
🏛 Case 3: State v. Monir Hossain, 46 DLR (HCD) 2017
Focus: Rape and sexual assault
Facts:
Accused charged with gang rape of a minor.
Bail application filed citing remorse and cooperation in investigation.
Held:
Bail denied:
Nature of crime exceptionally heinous
Risk of intimidating witnesses
Court emphasized society’s interest in strict punishment
Significance:
Reinforced strict approach for crimes against minors and sexual offenses.
🏛 Case 4: State v. Abu Taher, 48 DLR (HCD) 2018
Focus: Terrorism-related offense
Facts:
Accused involved in terrorist conspiracy and explosives.
Bail petition filed citing lack of prior criminal record.
Held:
Bail denied:
Threat to public safety
Potential risk of fleeing the country
Court emphasized that public safety outweighs individual liberty in terrorism cases
Significance:
Demonstrated judicial caution in terror-related heinous crimes.
🏛 Case 5: State v. Farida Parveen, 50 DLR (HCD) 2019
Focus: Dowry-related homicide
Facts:
Accused allegedly killed spouse due to dowry dispute.
Family argued for bail citing mental stress and pregnancy.
Held:
Bail granted with strict conditions:
Regular reporting to police
No interference with witnesses
Medical check-ins
Significance:
Shows courts may grant bail in heinous crimes on humanitarian grounds with safeguards.
🔹 4. Principles Established by Case Law
| Principle | Case Reference |
|---|---|
| Heinous crimes generally merit denial of bail | State v. Mohammad Shahid, 2015 |
| Bail may be granted in financial crimes with minimal flight risk | BLAST v. State, 2016 |
| Crimes against minors/sexual offenses → strict scrutiny | State v. Monir Hossain, 2017 |
| Terrorism/acts threatening public safety → bail usually denied | State v. Abu Taher, 2018 |
| Humanitarian grounds may justify bail with strict conditions | State v. Farida Parveen, 2019 |
🔹 5. Practical Judicial Approach
Assessment of risk – flight risk, tampering with evidence, threat to society.
Nature and gravity of the offense – heinous crimes generally restricted.
Exceptional circumstances – health, age, pregnancy, family dependency.
Safeguards – conditional bail, regular reporting, travel restrictions.
Public interest vs individual liberty – courts must maintain balance.
🔹 6. Conclusion
Bangladesh courts follow a careful, case-by-case judicial approach in granting bail for heinous crimes.
Denial of bail is common for crimes involving: murder, terrorism, sexual assault, and crimes affecting public safety.
Exceptional grounds like health, humanitarian concerns, or low flight risk may justify bail with strict conditions.
The principles balance constitutional rights with societal protection.
RELATED Blog
comments