Read Time: 06 minutes

Synopsis

The Delhi High Court on Monday expressed concern over the "disturbing trend" in subordinate courts entertaining bail applications despite the same pending before the High Courts. 

Justice Anoop Kumar Mendiratta directed all trial courts to ascertain from the parties whether similar proceedings in the same matter were pending before higher forums. Court further directed that parties should also disclose if earlier bail applications had been rejected.

Court held that such practices would ensure that the doctrine of judicial discipline and propriety is upheld and would avoid any forum shopping. 

Justice Mendiratta was dealing with a petition filed by an accused challenging the order of the Additional Sessions Judge (ASJ) at Tis Hazari Courts which rejected his bail application.

Justice Mendiratta observed that subordinate courts are bound by judicial discipline and propriety and must have regard to the hierarchical system of courts. He further observed that where bail application preferred by the accused were already rejected by the higher courts, the same should be given due consideration. 

Court observed that while the accused whose bail application has been rejected by the court is not precluded from filing subsequent applications for grant of bail, a fresh bail application can only be filed upon a change of circumstances. Thus, in case a subsequent application is allowed, the court has a duty to record fresh grounds which persuade it to take a view different from the earlier applications preferred on behalf of the accused. 

"As such judicial wisdom forecasts a duty on concerned court to make enquiry as to pending bail application, if any, with courts in hierarchy or rejection of any bail application by higher court, to avoid any miscarriage of justice. The consideration of bail application by subordinate courts despite pendency of ab application with the higher court or without due consideration of the grounds of rejection or earlier application by higher courts, maybe an utter disregard to judicial discipline", the court observed in its order.

Background

The case against the accused was of having committed trespass in the house of the complainant during her absence while they had gone to Gujarat due to COVID-19 in June, 2020. The accused was arrested in September, 2021 after he was found guilty of falsification of property documents to the house and was chargesheeted by the police.

The prosecution further claimed that while the accused was in custody the bail applications of the accused were dismissed by the Additional Chief Metropolitan Judge and the Additional Sessions Judge, once before filing the chargesheet and once thereafter. Both bail applications were rejected. 

Thereafter the accused approached the Delhi High Court in a plea challenging his rejection of bail. 

Cause Title: Shiv Lingam v The State & Anr.