38.6c New Delhi, India, Thursday, October 09, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Liberal approach needed for considering bail under S 437(6) CrPC: SC [Read Order]

By Jhanak Sharma      19 February, 2025 01:03 PM      0 Comments
Liberal approach needed for considering bail under S 4376 CrPC SC

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has batted for adopting a liberal approach in considering bail plea filed under Section 437(6) of the Criminal Procedure Code, even though it asserted the provision cannot be considered to be mandatory in nature and cannot be interpreted to grant an absolute and indefeasible right of bail in favour of accused.  

SC on Bail Under Section 437(6) CrPC: Liberal Approach with Judicial Discretion

A bench of Justices J B Pardiwala and R Mahadevan said bail applications filed under Section 437(6) have to be given a liberal approach and it would be a sound and judicious exercise of discretion in favour of the accused by the court concerned.

According to Section 437(6) bail can be granted, in any case triable by a Magistrate, if the trial of a person accused of any non bailable offence is not concluded within a period of 60 days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case.

Supreme Court Clarifies Bail Rights: Section 437(6) CrPC Explained

In a judgment on February 18, 2025, the bench granted bail to appellant Subhelal alias Sushil Sahu, arrested in December, 2023 in a cheating case lodged in Raipur.

The case was related to defrauding almost 2000 investors in a scheme of crypto currency. The bench directed him to deposit Rs 35 lakh as a bail condition.

"We have been condemning the High Courts when they impose such conditions. But here is a case wherein we are compelled to impose such conditions having regard to the peculiar facts of this case," the bench said.

Going through facts of the matter, the bench questioned the prosecution for naming 189 witnesses in the case.

The court, however, said even if 50 witnesses are examined, it would take a long time for the trial to conclude in the case, carrying maximum sentence of seven years jail.

The appellant's counsel cited Section 437(6) for bail.

Explaining the legal provision, the court said in these cases, some of the factors to be considered included where there is no chance of tampering of evidence e.g. where the case depends on documentary evidence which is already collected; no fault on part of the accused in causing of delay; no chances of any abscondence by the accused; little scope for conclusion of trial in near future and where the period for which accused has been in jail is substantial in comparison to the sentence prescribed for the offence for which he is tried.

"Normal parameters for deciding bail application would also be relevant while deciding application under Section 437(6), but not with that rigour as they might have been at the time of application for regular bail," the bench said.

The court thus said the application under Section 437(6) has to be dealt with liberal hands to protect individual liberty as envisaged under the Constitution and sought to be protected by insertion of the provision by the legislature.

"The provision can certainly be said to have been inserted with an intention to speed up the trial without unnecessarily detaining a person as an under-trial prisoner for a prolonged time. Contrary to that, Section 167(2) (statutory bail) leaves no room for any discretion with the court so far as release of an accused on bail is concerned in the given set of circumstances," the bench said.

The court, however, pointed out later part of sub-section (6) of Section 437 empowered a Magistrate to refuse bail by assigning reasons.

"In our view, the legislature has incorporated this provision with a view to recognise the right of an accused for a speedy trial with a view to protect individual liberty," the bench said.

At the same time, the bench said, the legislature has tried to strike a balance by allowing the Magistrate to refuse bail by assigning reasons ina given set of circumstances.

The court further spelled out, "Meaning thereby, that where in the opinion of the Magistrate, it is not proper or desirable or in the interest of justice to release such accused on bail, he may refuse bail by assigning reasons. The provisions of Section 437(6), as such, cannot be considered to be mandatory in nature and cannot be interpreted to grant an absolute and indefeasible right of bail in favour of accused." 
 

[Read Order]



Share this article:

About:

Jhanak is a lawyer by profession and legal journalist by passion. She graduated at the top of her cl...Read more

Follow:
FacebookTwitterLinkedinInstagram


Leave a feedback about this
Related Posts
View All

Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations Another CBI Officer Investigating Rakesh Asthana Moves SC Against Transfer, Makes Startling Revelations

After A.K. Bassi, another CBI officer who was investigating corruption allegations against Special Director Rakesh Asthana moved the Supreme Court.

Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land Ayodhya verdict: SC rules in favour of Ram Lalla, Sunni Waqf Board gets alternate land

SC bench led by CJI Ranjan Gogoi has allotted the dispute site to Ram Janmabhoomi Nyas, while directing the government to allot an alternate 5 acre land within Ayodhya to Sunni Waqf Board to build a mosque.

Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi Supreme Court: Money Spent On Judiciary Less Than 1% In All States Except Delhi

The court guided all states to document their response to the commission's report within four weeks. If any of the states fail to file a response, it will be presumed that they have no objections to the recommendations made by the commission, the court said.

Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts Supreme Court Top Panel Names Chief Justices for Bombay, Orissa and Meghalaya High Courts

On April 18, 2020, the Supreme Court Collegium recommended new Chief Justices for three High Courts. Justice Dipankar Datta was proposed as Chief Justice of the Bombay High Court, succeeding Justice B.P. Dharmadhikari. Justice Biswanath Somadder was nominated as Chief Justice of Meghalaya High Court, while Justice Mohammad Rafiq was recommended for transfer as Chief Justice of Orissa High Court.

TRENDING NEWS

pmla-appellate-tribunal-orders-immediate-release-of-seized-bmw-x7-in-hemant-soren-land-scam-case
Trending Crime, Police And Law
PMLA appellate tribunal orders immediate release of seized BMW X7 in Hemant Soren land scam case [Read Order]

PMLA tribunal orders ED to release seized BMW X7 in Hemant Soren land scam case, citing lack of proof linking the luxury car to money laundering.

08 October, 2025 08:06 PM
offence-under-category-of-upholding-family-prestige-sc-orders-release-of-man-on-remission
Trending Judiciary
'Offence under category of upholding family prestige,' SC orders release of man on remission [Read Judgment]

SC orders immediate release of life convict who served 22 years for a murder committed to uphold family honour, citing Maharashtra remission guidelines.

08 October, 2025 08:19 PM

TOP STORIES

allahabad-hc-refuses-interim-protection-to-sambhal-mosque-asks-petitioners-to-approach-appellate-court
Trending Judiciary
Allahabad HC Refuses Interim Protection to Sambhal Mosque, Asks Petitioners to Approach Appellate Court [Read Order]

Allahabad High Court refused interim protection to Sambhal mosque, directing petitioners to seek remedy before the appellate court under UP Revenue Code.

06 October, 2025 04:48 PM
calling-off-marriage-after-courtship-not-a-crime-or-breach-of-promise-delhi-hc
Trending Judiciary
Calling Off Marriage After Courtship Not A Crime Or Breach Of Promise: Delhi HC [Read Order]

Delhi High Court grants bail, ruling that ending marriage plans after courtship is not a breach of promise or offence under false promise to marry.

06 October, 2025 05:03 PM
celebrating-bail-on-social-media-not-ground-for-cancellation-without-specific-threat-to-complainant-delhi-hc
Trending Judiciary
Celebrating Bail On Social Media Not Ground For Cancellation Without Specific Threat To Complainant: Delhi HC [Read Order]

Delhi HC rules that celebrating bail on social media isn’t grounds for cancellation unless a specific threat or intimidation is proven.

06 October, 2025 05:25 PM
woman-cannot-claim-maintenance-after-securing-rape-conviction-against-live-in-partner-jammu-and-kashmir-hc
Trending Judiciary
Woman Cannot Claim Maintenance After Securing Rape Conviction Against Live-In Partner: Jammu & Kashmir HC [Read Order]

J&K High Court held that a woman who secured a rape conviction against her live-in partner cannot claim maintenance under Section 125 CrPC.

06 October, 2025 06:08 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email