38.6c New Delhi, India, Monday, January 12, 2026
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Delhi HC Mandates Presence Of Informant Or Authorized Person At The Time Of Hearing Bail Application Of Accused In Rape Cases [Read Direction]

By LawStreet News Network      26 September, 2019 05:55 PM      0 Comments
Delhi HC Mandates Presence Of Informant Or Authorized Person At The Time Of Hearing Bail Application Of Accused In Rape Cases [Read Direction]

The Delhi High Court on September 24, 2019, has issued a Practice Direction mandating the presence of the informant or any person authorized by him in the court, at the time of hearing of the bail application of a person accused of rape.

The directions made by the Chief Justice of the Delhi High Court, Justice D. N. Patel shall come into force with immediate effect.

The direction was issued in view of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 2018, which had amended Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, to this effect.

It inserted sub-section 1A to Section 439, obligating the presence of the informant or any person authorized by him at the time of hearing of the bail application of a person accused of offences triable under Sections 376, 376AB, 376DA and 376DB of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The courts direction reads as under:-

(a) Before granting bail to a person who is accused of an offence triable under sub-Section (3) of section 376 or section 376-AB or section 376-DA or section 376-DB of the Indian Penal Code, the High Court or the Court of Session shall give notice of the application for bail to the Public Prosecutor within a period of fifteen days from the date of receipt of the notice of such application; and

(b) The Courts shall ensure that the Investigating Officer has, in writing as per Annexure A, communicated to the informant or any person authorized by her that her presence is obligatory at the time of hearing of the application for bail to the person under sub-section (3) of section 376 or section 376-AB or section 376-DA or section 376-DB of the Indian Penal Code. Annexure A shall be filed by the I.O. along with the Reply / Status Report to such bail application and the Courts shall make all endeavour to ensure presence of the informant or any person authorized by her.

[Read Direction]



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
TRENDING NEWS


TOP STORIES

wrong-bail-orders-alone-without-evidence-of-corruption-cannot-justify-removal-of-judicial-officer-sc
Trending Judiciary
Wrong Bail Orders Alone, Without Evidence of Corruption, Cannot Justify Removal of Judicial Officer: SC [Read Judgment]

Supreme Court rules that wrong bail orders alone cannot justify removal of a judicial officer without proof of corruption, misconduct, or extraneous considerations.

06 January, 2026 07:43 PM
divorced-muslim-woman-can-seek-maintenance-under-crpc-even-after-receiving-amount-under-muslim-women-protection-act-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Divorced Muslim Woman Can Seek Maintenance Under CrPC Even After Receiving Amount Under Muslim Women Protection Act: Kerala HC [Read Order]

Kerala High Court holds that a divorced Muslim woman can claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC even after receiving amounts under the 1986 Act.

06 January, 2026 08:19 PM
delhi-hc-full-bench-settles-bsf-seniority-dispute-rule-of-continuous-regular-appointment-prevails
Trending Judiciary
Delhi HC Full Bench Settles BSF Seniority Dispute; Rule of ‘Continuous Regular Appointment’ Prevails [Read Judgment]

Delhi High Court Full Bench rules BSF seniority is based on date of continuous regular appointment, rejecting claims for antedated seniority due to delayed joining.

06 January, 2026 08:45 PM
borrowers-cannot-invoke-writ-jurisdiction-to-compel-banks-to-extend-one-time-settlement-benefits-kerala-hc
Trending Judiciary
Borrowers Cannot Invoke Writ Jurisdiction to Compel Banks to Extend One-Time Settlement Benefits: Kerala HC [Read Judgment]

Kerala High Court holds borrowers cannot invoke writ jurisdiction to compel banks to grant One-Time Settlement benefits, as OTS is not a legal right.

07 January, 2026 09:22 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email