Read Time: 05 minutes

Synopsis

The Supreme Court has set aside an order by the Madhya Pradesh High Court, which cancelled the bail granted to two murder accused as their counsel failed to argue the matter due to lawyers' strike.

A bench of Justices Hrishikesh Roy and Sanjay Karol allowed a plea by one Ram Swaroop Patel against the Madhya Pradesh High Court's order of March 28, 2023.

"The High Court cancelled the bail and one of the ground for cancellation is that when the complainant filed the application for cancellation of bail, the counsel for the accused was not present in court," the bench said.

The bench provided relief to the petitioners clarifying that the interim order passed by the top court in favour of Ram Swaroop Patel on May 23, 2023 and in favour of Ram Het Patel on June 02, 2023, were made absolute.

Both the accused were named in an FIR related to murder and other offences. They were arrested on March 31, 2022. Thereafter, bail was granted by the Madhya Pradesh High Court to Ram Swaroop Patel on September 12, 2022 and to Ram Het Patel on September 27, 2022.

However, the high court cancelled the bail on a plea made by the complainant on a later date. 

Their counsel submitted that on the due date, the advocates had abstained from court work on account of the strike called by the State Bar Council of Madhya Pradesh and that is why the petitioners were not represented in court.

A counsel for the State, on the other hand, opposed the plea, contending that there were allegations of a threat made by the petitioners to the family members of the informant. The counsel for the informant, in her turn, submitted that the petitioner Ram Het Patel had not been appearing on each date before the trial court.

The counsel for the petitioners denied the contention. Referring to the nature of the complaint made, the petitioners' counsel further submitted that they had not misused the liberty of bail. Both the petitioners would certainly participate in the trial court as 3 of the 23 prosecution witnesses had already been examined, the cousel assured the court.

While granting relief to the petitioners, the bench said, "It is however made clear that the petitioners must maintain distance from the informant and their family members and if there is any complaint of intimidation by the petitioners, the trial court will be at liberty to take appropriate action against them".

"Both petitioners are also expected to diligently participate before the trial court," the bench ordered.

Case Title: RAM SWAROOP PATEL VERSUS THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH & ANR