Life Is Important To All, Persons Committing Brutal Murder Of One Cannot Now Seek Bail To Save Their Father’s Life:...
Case Principle: Bail Denied Despite Humanitarian Grounds
The Supreme Court recently dealt with a case where accused persons who had allegedly committed a brutal murder sought bail on humanitarian grounds, saying they needed to take care of their ailing father.
The Court refused their plea and held:
👉 “Life is equally important to all. Those who commit brutal murder of one person cannot later seek bail to save their own father’s life.”
This means the right to life of the victim cannot be overlooked, and granting bail merely because the accused’s family member is unwell would undermine justice.
Reasoning of the Court
Seriousness of the Crime
Bail jurisprudence says that gravity of the offence and nature of allegations are prime considerations.
In cases of brutal, heinous murders, courts must be cautious before granting bail.
Humanitarian Grounds Not Absolute
Courts may grant temporary bail/parole in exceptional cases (medical treatment, family emergencies), but this cannot override the seriousness of murder charges.
Balancing Article 21
While Article 21 (Right to Life and Liberty) applies to the accused and their family, it equally applies to the victim and society.
The accused cannot claim liberty at the cost of denying justice to the victim.
Danger of Misuse
If bail is granted on such grounds, accused may abscond, threaten witnesses, or obstruct trial, especially in heinous crime cases.
Supporting Case Laws
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan @ Pappu Yadav (2004) 7 SCC 528
Bail should not be granted in cases involving heinous offences unless exceptional grounds exist.
Neeru Yadav v. State of U.P. (2014) 16 SCC 508
SC cancelled bail of a history-sheeter accused of murder, stressing that criminal antecedents + brutality of offence must be given priority.
State of U.P. v. Amarmani Tripathi (2005) 8 SCC 21
Factors like gravity of offence, nature of accusation, and possibility of tampering are key in bail decisions.
Ramesh Bhavan Rathod v. Vishanbhai Hirabhai Makwana (2021) 6 SCC 230
Bail order passed ignoring seriousness of offence or relevant factors is liable to be set aside.
Union of India v. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713
SC said long incarceration and delay in trial may justify bail in some cases, but not in brutal murders where evidence and trial are progressing.
Conclusion
Bail cannot be claimed as a matter of compassion when accused are charged with brutal murder.
The Supreme Court made it clear that victim’s life is equally important; humanitarian pleas (like father’s illness) cannot outweigh the gravity of offence.
The correct path in such cases is to seek temporary parole/escort facility, not regular bail.
RELATED Blog
0 comments