High Court seeking explanation from sessions judge who granted bail will have 'chilling effect' on district judiciary: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently took exception to the Madhya Pradesh High Court seeking an explanation from a sessions judge for an order he had passed granting bail to an accused person [Totaram vs State of Madhya Pradesh & anr]. .It was unwarranted for the High Court to have issued a show-cause notice to the judge while also ordering the immediate arrest of the accused, a bench of Chief Justice of India (CJI) DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala said. Such orders, the top court said, can have a chilling effect on district judiciary."The order of the High Court directing that the appellant be arrested immediately and seeking an explanation from the Second Additional Sessions Judge was wholly disproportionate and was not warranted. Such orders of the High Court produce a chilling effect on the District judiciary. The members of the district judiciary cannot be placed in a sense of fear if they were to exercise the jurisdiction lawfully entrusted to them for granting bail in appropriate cases," the apex court's order of April 6 said.The bail order had been passed by the sessions judge with due regard to the nature of the offence and developments in the case, the apex court further explained.It, therefore, set aside the High Court order..The top court was hearing an appeal against the High Court order from December 2022 cancelling the bail of the appellant. The appellant was accused of tying the complainant to a tree, stripping and assaulting him in June 2022.The High Court had observed that a chargesheet being filed could not have been considered as a change in circumstance warranting grant of bail by the sessions judge.It had, therefore, set aside the bail order and directed the police to arrest the appellant immediately. The accused then moved the apex court which, in February, stayed the High Court's order, released the petitioner on bail, and issued notice in the matter.The interim bail was made by permanent by means of the April 6 order, and the High Court order cancelling bail was set aside..Advocate Rekha Pandey appeared for the appellant-accused. Advocate Anuradha Mutatker represented the respondents.[Read Order]