High Courts should frame rules for disclosure of criminal antecedents in bail pleas: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Friday asked the High Courts to consider framing a rule that mandates the accused to disclose their involvement in other criminal cases when applying for bail in a particular case [Kaushal Singh vs State of Rajasthan]

A Bench of Justices Vikram Nath, Sanjay Karol and Sandeep Mehta took not of a rule framed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court which mandates that accused seeking bail should disclose any others criminal case they may be facing.

"We feel that every High Court in the country should consider incorporating a similar provision in the respective High Court Rules and/or Criminal Side Rules as it would impose an obligation on the accused to make disclosures regarding his/her involvement in any other criminal case(s) previously registered," the top court said.

The Court directed that its order copy shall be communicated "to the Registrar Generals of all the High Courts so that incorporation of a similar Rule in the respective Rules can be considered, if such provision does not exist from earlier.”

The Court was dealing with a a judicial officer’s appeal seeking expunction of adverse remarks made against him by the Rajasthan High Court in relation to grant of bail to an accused in an attempt to murder case.

The sessions judge (petitioner), acting as a link officer, had granted bail to an accused on grounds of parity, based on a High Court bail order granting bail to co-accused. The bail granted by the sessions judge was later cancelled by another sessions judge on an application moved by the complainant.

When the accused then moved High Court for bail, the petitioner-judge was criticised by a single-judge for having granted bail without noticing the accused’s criminal background.

However, the top court said the judicial officer had not been given a chance to explain his side before the remarks were made by the single-judge.

“The strictures and/or the scathing observations were made by the learned Single Judge of the High Court to the detriment of the appellant-Judicial Officer without providing him any opportunity of explanation or showing cause,” it said.

Finding that the strictures against the petitioner were uncalled for, the Court expunged them and modified the High Court order accordingly.

The appellant was represented by Senior Advocate R Balasubramanian along with advocates Javed Khan and Vanya Gupta.

Additional Advocate General Sanskriti Pathak appeared for State of Rajasthan.

[Read Judgment]