The Supreme Court on Wednesday asked both the Allahabad High Court and the Uttar Pradesh government to jointly discuss and then submit suggestions for regulating bail applications, during the pendency of the appeals of convicts.
A bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and B.R. Gavai said: “State government has said something and now you (Allahabad High Court) have said something. They have given suggestions and now you have given counter-suggestions of 20-25 pages.”
It noted that the Allahabad High Court registry has given suggestions, which are like counter-suggestions to the Uttar Pradesh government, and asked how will they zero in on the most suitable ones?
“If you are unable to give suggestions, then we will formulate some guidelines on our own,” the bench said.
Additional Advocate General Garima Prashad, representing the Uttar Pradesh, submitted they will sit together and compile the most suitable suggestions. The top court has scheduled the matter for further hearing on October 5.
The High Court has given a slew of suggestions to the top court, like in cases of serious and grave offences, that a “victim impact assessment” report should be obtained after consulting the victim and taking into account his or her family rights, before granting bail.
The high court’s registry, in an affidavit, has given its suggestions following a top court order asking it to help in laying down “broad parameters” to regulate bail applications matter, during the pendency of the appeals of convicted persons.
It suggested that victim impact assessment report should record concerns of the victim along with vital information on physical, mental, and social impact of the crime and the impact of bail to the accused. “The rights of the victim and his family should be considered before granting of bail,” it added.
The high court, as a measure to tackle the huge pendency of cases, suggested that dedicated benches should be constituted for hearing long-pending criminal appeals.
“The high court is facing immense pressure on account of the huge pendency of cases. Therefore, the accused may not be given benefit thereof in a mechanical manner unless special benches dedicated for deciding appeals early are constituted,” it said.
The top court is hearing 18 criminal appeals of persons convicted in heinous offences, seeking bail on the ground that they have spent seven or more years in jail. The appeals against the convictions have not been listed for regular hearing in the high court due to pendency.
