qwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyui

opasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfgh
jklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvb
nmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwer
Role of Courts in Granting Bail and
Bail Reforms
tyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopas
Project: Criminal procedure Code
Submitted to: Mr. Manoj Kumar
dfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzx
8/29/2013

cvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmq
Author: Kriti Kumar, Semester VII, HNLU, Raipur.

wertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuio
pasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghj
klzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbn
mqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwerty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
vbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmrty
uiopasdfghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdf
ghjklzxcvbnmqwertyuiopasdfghjklzxc
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. Acknowledgements………………………………………………….……………........3

2. Objective ……………………………….…………….………………………….……..4

3. Methodology…………………………………………………………………………....5

4. Chapters

 Chapter 1: Introduction………….………......…………..………………..…………...6

 Chapter 2: The Concept Of Bail ……………………………………………………....7

 Historical Aspect Of Bails

 History Of Bails In England
 History Of Bails In India

 Chapter 3: The Bail System In India: Policy And Role Of Courts…………….…......9

 The Legislative Base
 Judicial Policy And Role Of Courts

 Chapter 4: Anticipatory Bail ………….………......………………………..………..12

 Nature And Purpose
 Judicial Approach

 Chapter 5: Evaluation Of Bail System In India And Bail Reforms Required To Fill
The Loopholes ………….………......…………..………………..…………………14
 Evaluation Of Bail System
 Bail Reforms

5. Conclusion – Summing Up………………..………………………………….……17

6. Bibliography………………………………………………..……………….….......18

2
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This is not just a customary acknowledgement of help that I received but a sincere
expression of gratitude to all those who have helped me complete this project and made it seem
apparently more readable than otherwise it would have been.

I am in debt to my faculty advisor Mr. Manoj Kumar for giving such an interesting and
amazing topic ‘Role of Criminal Courts in Granting Bail and Bail Reforms’ and making it
seem easy by lucidly explaining its various aspects. I would like to thank him for guiding me in
doing all sorts of researches, suggestions and having discussions regarding my project topic by
devoting his precious time.

I thank H.N.L.U for providing Library, Computer and Internet facilities. And lastly I
thank my friends and all those persons who have given valuable suggestions pertaining to the
topic and have been a constant source of help and support.

Thanking everyone,

Kriti Kumar
Roll Number: 60
Semester VII

3
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

OBJECTIVES

Bail Reforms is supposedly one of the few most important topics in the Code of Criminal
Procedure. The hullabaloo revolves around the role that court plays in granting such bails. This
project tries to explain this concept of bail and bail reforms and their legal implications. It sheds
light on the present Indian scenario and while doing so also addresses the recent provisions in
this regard. Thus the further objectives are-

 To understand the concept of bails.

 To analyze the concept Bail System in India.
 To understand the concept of Anticipatory Bail.
 To scrutinize related judicial pronouncements.
 Evaluation of Bail System in India and the required Bail Reforms.

4
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Laymen tend to believe that good ideas just come to an academic author who possesses a
holy spark. To refute this view is just as difficult as it is to establish that new ideas are invariably
the outcome of meticulous work. Undoubtedly inspiration plays an important role in the selection
by an author of a fruitful area for research and is indispensable for recognizing and developing a
good idea. In its absence a fascinating topic may receive a mundane and boring treatment.

George III is reputed to have said that-

“The lawyers do not know much more law than other people but they know better where
to find it.”

The researcher has adopted the doctrinal methodology and has based her research mainly on
secondary sources of information like books, articles, judgments and internet. The author has
done extensive research on Role of Courts in Granting Bail and Bail Reforms in this project.
For this purpose, the author has relied on both primary as well as secondary sources.

5
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

INTRODUCTION
Bail though primarily a legal term, has acclaimed usage both by law men and lay men. It
however, has not been statutorily defined. Conceptually, it continues to be understood as a right
for assertion of freedom against the state imposed restraints. The main purpose of arrest of
an accused is to secure his presence on trial and to ensure his being available for
punishment on conviction. If the presence of an accused at his trial can be ensured by
means other than his arrest or detention, it would be quite possible to allow him the
enjoyment of his liberty during his trial. One of the ways to prevent unnecessary
deprivation of the liberty of an accused is ‘BAIL’.

Literally the expression Bail denotes a security for appearance of a prisoner for his release.
Etymologically, the word is derived from an old French verb ‘bailer’ which means to give or
to deliver, although another view is that its derivation is from the Latin term bajulare meaning
to bear a burden.

Bail is a generic term which means the judicial release from custody. The release on bail in a
criminal case after furnishing the required bond is recognized as the fundamental aspect of
Human Rights. The Code of Criminal Procedure lays down the norms of granting bail and
bonds in section 436 to 450. But there is no definition of the word bail in the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973. The offences are however classified as Bailable and Non-Bailable. Article 21
of the Constitution of India provides complete safeguard to every Indian Citizen, irrespective
of caste, creed and colour – the rich, the poor alike for the protection of life and personal liberty.

Bail is thus a grant of conditional liberty to an accused who assures or on whose behalf
assurance is given that he would be present at the trial. Bail may thus be regarded as a
mechanism whereby the state devolutes upon the community the function of securing the
presence of the prisoner and at the same time involves participation of the community in
administration in justice.

6
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

The Author of this present project topic will delve into the role of criminal courts in granting bail
to the accused and will also make an in depth analysis of loopholes in the Bail Laws and certain
reforms required to make the system more full proof.

I. THE CONCEPT OF BAIL

A. HISTORICAL ASPECT OF BAILS

The custom of bail grew during medieval ages in England out of need to free untried
prisoners from disease ridden jails while they were waiting for the long delayed trials
conducted by travelling justices. Prisoners were bailed or delivered to reputable third parties
of their own choice who accepted responsibility for assuring their appearance at the trial. If
the accused did not appear, his bailer would stand trial in his place. But this system did not
work for a long time as it was too big a punishment for the person who stood surety for the
accused person. As is rightly said – ‘necessity is the mother of invention’. From this grew the
modern practice of posting a money bond through a commercial bondsman who receives a
cash premium for his service and usually demands some collateral security as well. In the
event of non appearance, the bond is forfeited after a grace period of number of days,
during which the bondsman may produce the accused in court1.

B. HISTORY OF BAILS IN ENGLAND:

Under the English Law, the operational mode for interim release of an accused was that a
surety had to be bound to produce the accused to stand his trial on the day appointed for
such trial. This position was in keeping with the concept of the King’s Peace, it made
responsible the party in whose custody the accused had been delivered, under the recognized
principle of law that a body could be detained for body released. Such a position would
seemingly be untenable in a land where Magna Carta has remained the mainstay of liberty.
1
Janak Raj Jai, Bail Law and Procedures, Third edition, Universal Law Publishing, New Delhi, 2004 at pg 1-2.

7
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

But the law of bail of the kind mentioned above, subsisted and emanated from the courts concern
and obligation towards the King’s Peace which theoretically had been intolerant of any
disturbance being caused to the public or to interests of the sovereign2.

It can thus be found that the concept of bail under the English common law concerned itself with
both the values namely, that of personal freedom as well as that of the security of the politico
legal system.

C. HISTORY OF BAILS IN INDIA:

In India the concept is traced back to ancient Hindu jurisprudence which required, inter alia,
an expedient disposal of disputes by the functionaries responsible for administration of
justice. No laxity could be afforded in the matter as it entailed penalities on the functionaries3.
Thus a judicial interposition took care to ensure that an accused person was not unnecessarily
detained or incarcerated. This indeed devised practical modes both for securing the presence of a
wrongdoer, as well as to spare him of undue strains of his personal freedom.

During Mughal rule, the Indian legal system is recorded to have an institution of bail with the
system of releasing an arrested person his furnishing a surety. The use of this system finds
reference in the seventeenth century travelogue of an Italian traveler Manucci who himself was
resorted to his freedom by bail from imprisonment for a false charge of theft. He was then
granted bail by then ruler of Punjab but the Kotwal released him only after he furnished a
surety4.

Under Mughal law an interim release could possibly be actuated by the consideration that if
dispensation of justice got delayed in one’s case then compensatory claims could me made on
the judge himself for losses sustained by the aggrieved party5. The advent of British rule in India
saw gradual adaptation of the principles and practices known to Britishers and prevalent in the
common law. The increasing control of the East India Company over Nizamat Adalats and other

2
Wani Afsal & Verma S.K., Right to Bail, Indian Law Institute, New Delhi, 2000, at pg 4
3
R.P Kagnle, Kautilya Arthshastra IV, 1963, ch.9
4
William Irivine, Mughal India, Vol II, 198 (1907); Manucci’s travel account of the mid seventeenth century was
originally published in Italian and was translated later by William Irvine.
5
Sarkar J.N., Mughal Administration In India, 1920 at pg 108

8
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

fouzdary courts in the mofussil facilitated gradual inroads of English criminal law and procedure
into the then Indian legal system6.

II. THE BAIL SYSTEM IN INDIA: POLICY AND ROLE OF COURTS

A. THE LEGISLATIVE BASE

The Statutory fabric of the bail system in India is mainly comprised of some provisions of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, particularly extending from sections 436-439. The real
matrix of the system is however found in the judicial decisions. A view of both is indispensable
for a proper understanding of the pros and cons of the bail system in India. Section 436
prescribes a doctrine that bail can be had as of right by a person who has been arrested without a
warrant. Since arrest without a warrant is a serious encroachment upon an individual’s personal
liberty, the doctrine comes as a protective check against executive action. This right is extended
to cover situations where the interests of society are not likely to be damaged by bailing out a
person; instead the state’s obligation to protect individual liberty gets promoted.

Section 437 provides for seeking and getting bail in non bailable cases. However, certain limits
have been set out. The society is unwilling to expose itself to such high risks as may affect its
security and stability. Accordingly in non-bailable cases, if circumstances of the case reasonably
suggest and events and antecedents speak of a probability of guilt of such a high order that it may
attract a sentence of death or life imprisonment then the privilege of being bailed out is denied.
But risks emanating from a juvenile, a woman, a sick or an infirm person may not be so grave as
they may be in other cases. An exception has, therefore has been carved out to admit such
persons to bail for alleged non bailable felonies also7.

B. JUDICIAL POLICY AND ROLE OF COURTS

6
Wani Afsal & Verma S.K., Right to Bail, Indian Law Institute, New Delhi, 2000, at pg 5
7
Wani Afsal & Verma S.K., Right to Bail, Indian Law Institute, New Delhi, 2000, at pg 15-16

9
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

Callousness of law enforcement agencies attendant with other abuses in the criminal judicial
administration are an oppressive burden of indigent, poor and illiterate accused persons. These
factors arouse the sensitivity of the court and in countering the ill effects of the same the courts
use the lever of human rights to take a relaxed view of the bail system.

Keeping in mind the aforementioned concept the Supreme Court gave a landmark judgment in
Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar8. The court held that “it would be more consonant with
the ethos of our Constitution that instead of risk of financial loss the system should take into
consideration other relevant factors such as family ties, roots in the community, job security,
membership of stable organizations etc”. The court emphasized that these ought to be the
determinative factors and laid down that primarily the pre trial release should be obtained on
personal bond without monetary obligation.

In Maneka Gandhi v. Union9 of India it was laid that a speedy trial is the essence of criminal
justice and there can be no doubt that delay in trial by itself constitutes denial of justice.

A scrutiny of the recent judicial dicta reveals that the consideration of delay in the proceedings
has indeed influenced the courts in granting bail in cases like Virsa Singh v. State through
CBI10, Jai Singh v. State of Rajasthan11, Mohamad Yusuf Ali v. Asst. Collector of Customs12
and many others.

In Jai Singh v. State of Rajasthan13 the court has observed “it is really disturbing that the trial
courts are so unaware of liberties of the citizens. Now it is settled proposition of law that
expeditious criminal trial is a fundamental right of the accused, especially when he is in jail or
uncertain period, as an under trial prisoner, especially when there is no fault on his part”.

In many cases the judiciary has shown a direct concern for individual freedom and personal
liberty. Thus, where the sessions court dismissed a bail application without assigning any

8
1979 CR.L.J.1045 (SC)
9
AIR 1978 SC 597
10
1992 CR.L.J.164
11
1992 CR.L.J.2873
12
1992 CR.L.J.3285
13
Supra note 12

10
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

reason,the High Court granted bail14. Plea of alibi and all other plausible defences has also been
held worth consideration in matters of grant of bail15.
The insistence for high cash security for bail came for drastic criticism by the Karnataka High
Court in the case of Afsal Khan v. State by Girija Nagar Police16. The court observed that in the
case on hand, the present approach of the sessions judge in insisting upon the petitioner to
deposit a cash security of Rs. 750 in each case totaling Rs. 6750 is not only harsh and oppressive
but indirectly denial of bail thus depriving the person his individual liberty.

Following the pro personal liberty stance the courts have granted bail to a co-accused in a case
under sections 302, 324, 504, 506, IPC for having been involved only in extortion17. The courts
have accordingly taken a cumulative view of all the three essential variables including the
process of justice, interests of the society and the personal liberty. The Madras High Court being
conscious of the connotation of bail as ‘restrictive liberty’ declared in Thaniel Victor v. State of
Tamil Nadu18 that a person who was granted bail by the court is deemed to be under the custody
of the court.

The court has categorically ruled in Shivarama Gowda v. State of Karnataka that collateral
considerations such as that the bail applicants being poor agriculturists, their families would be
constrained to starve etc. may not have any impact on the decision whether they should be
released on bail or not.

In bail matters the courts have taken into consideration the other requirements of fairness also.
Thus bail was cancelled where it was found that the accused was a relative of the lawyer and that
has influenced the judge19.

Thus the existing bail system and policy are characterized by consideration of personal liberty,
social security and safety and the requirements of fairness and justice, of which the courts are
trying to take a cumulative cognizance. Every judgment of the courts needs a separate
consideration because every case appears a new experience in itself.
14
Jatindra Singh v. State of Rajastan 1999 CR.L.J.158(Raj)
15
State of Gujarat v. Deepak Jasawantlal Sheth, 1999 CR.L.J.162
16
1992 CR.L.J.1976
17
Nand Kumar v. State of U.P. 1999 CR.L.J.2339 ; see also Ram Sanehi v. State of U.P. 1999 CR.L.J.3708.
18
1991 CR.L.J.2416 (Mad)
19
State of U.P. v. Dev Prakash, 1999 CR.L.J.3707

11
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

III. ANTICIPATORY BAIL

A. NATURE AND PURPOSE

One of the challenges that the law enforcement agencies are facing from the human rights
movement is that nobody should be confined in anyway, unless he is declared guilty. To meet
such posers the bail mechanism in India has been statutorily extended by induction into its fold a
comparatively new concept, commonly known as ‘anticipatory bail’. Section 438 of the Cr.PC
has been shaped to incorporate this concept. It deals with a situation where a person having
reasonable apprehension that he would be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-
bailable offence seeks to prevent his detention. Such a person can move an application in an
appropriate court, which may grant him an anticipatory bail.

B. JUDICIAL APPROACH

A Judicial approach to the exercise of discretion has been a cautious one. It does not and perhaps
cannot exercise the power on the assumption that a frivolous accusation may be at the back of a
proposed or initiated criminal proceeding. The nature of accusation is likely to determine the
attitude of the court in this regard. The discretionary power is to be exercised only after a notice
to the public prosecutor is given and necessary reasons are recorded if the court considers
granting of bail is necessary in the interests of justice.

In Narsingh Lal daga v. State of Bihar20 , Patna High Court ruled that the provisions be used in
cases where the court is convinced that the person is of such a status that he would not abscond
or otherwise misuse his liberty. The court further said that even before this provision was
introduced, there had been a practice in vogue which enabled a court to release on bail such

20
1977 CR.L.J.1776 (Pat)

12
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

persons without a surety or on their having given a personal undertaking that they would appear
before the court if required to do so.

In Badri Prasad Pathya v. State21 the court endorsed the view that grant of anticipatory bail is
mainly meant to relieve a person from being unnecessarily deprived of liberty; though in this
case the consideration of high hazards of releasing the persons alleged to be involved in a prima
facie case of murder weighed with the court in rejecting the application as against their claims
for personal liberty.

The purpose underlying section 438 of the code is to ensure that a person anticipating arrest is
not obliged to go to jail till he is able to move the court for being released on bail. But it cannot
also be constructed that such a direction should be allowed to come in the way of police
investigations nor should it seek to circumscribe police powers relating to remand to police
custody for purposes of facilitating investigation. Accordingly in Samabhai v. State of Gujarat22
the court observed that a direction for anticipatory bail would not be allowed to come in the way
of a fuller consideration of the question of custody of the person when the investigations are
incomplete.

The power of the sessions court and the high court to grant anticipatory bail has been brought out
in Devidas Raghu Naik v. State of Maharashtra23 by the Bombay High Court. In this case the
appellant’s prayer for anticipatory bail was rejected by the sessions court. He, therefore
approached the High Court with the same prayer on the same grounds. The court granted him
anticipatory bail clarifying, that there is no bar whatever for a party to approach either the high
court or the sessions court as concurrent jurisdiction is given to the high court and the sessions
court and the fact that the sessions court has refused a bail does not operate as a bar for the high
court entertaining a similar application.

In spite of the given reservations about the anticipatory bail, there exists another stream of
thought, according to which it can be safely observed that the anticipatory bail mechanism is a

21
1977 CR.L.J.1524 (Guj)
22
1977 CR.L.J.1524
23
1989 CR.L.J.252 (Bom)

13
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

necessity. Without it innumerable persons may be made to suffer in custody just on account of
some suspicion or a false charge. Also the experiences of courts in evolving useful precedent in
matters of anticipatory bail must not be undervalued.

IV. EVALUATION OF BAIL SYSTEM IN INDIA AND BAIL REFORMS

REQUIRED TO FILL THE LOOPHOLES

A. EVALUATION OF BAIL SYSTEM

The law governing bail in India is inadequate uncertain and above the ground. The working of
the system is also unsatisfactory. The administration of criminal justice has recognized that a bail
decision is recurring one which takes place through a number of distinct stages. It also
recognizes that pre trial releases by the police on bail are within purview of the bail system.
Further bail can be granted before the accused makes an appearance before the court or before
the verdict of the trial is passed and even after he has been declared guilty and convicted in order
to enable him to avail the appeal process.

The practice of releasing on bail has assumed the form wherein an accused enters into a bond
specifying a sum of money which he is liable to forfeit if he fails to perform any of the
obligations imposed on him by the court24. Generally the stipulated Guarantee in terms of money
in a bond is not deposited in cash in court, though the practice to do so in the case of a police bail
may be a valid one.

In addition to the bond, the release condition on bail may require a surety or sureties, who has
also to bind himself to pay a specified sum of money in the event of the failure of an accused to
appear before the police or the court on the appointed day. In the common law a surety was
essential to bail out a person which was later dispensed with. However the Code of Criminal
Procedure never spelled out the requirement of a surety as a pre-condition for release on bail
though in practice the courts grant bail only on the accused’s furnishing a bond with a surety25.

24
The procedure when bond has been forfeited is prescribed under section 446 of the Cr.PC 1973.
25
Wani Afsal & Verma S.K., Right to Bail, Indian Law Institute, New Delhi, 2000, at pg 171

14
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

B. BAIL REFORMS

Reformulation of bail provisions in the Code may alone be not sufficient to make the system of
bail function with a purpose. A serious effort of securing public support and participation in the
administration of criminal justice, coupled with necessary legislative, executive and judicial
powers to act effectively are most warranted. Such an effort alone can help in fulfilling the
preconditions required for smooth operation of the bail system. Urgent attention in this regard is
needed towards26:

a) Proper functioning of police powers

b) Developing the devices to control the police power

c) Speedy trial of the accused

d) Availability of legal aid and legal service

Reform of the existing bail law would require enactment of a comprehensive code to replace the
existing law on the subject. The proposed code must reflect the basic philosophy, utility and
guidance for grant and refusal of bail. Reforms would include rationalizing the basis of
classifying offences into bailable and non bailable ones. Bail with or without conditions and the
guidelines to be followed for purposes of imposing conditions together with the nature and
purpose thereof are also to be spelled out. The modes and forms of release will have to
rationalized, explained and streamlined so as to enable an accused to ask for a specific form of
release commensurate with his capacity and circumstances of the case.

Indulgence can be shown to the concept of Bail as a matter of right in cases where the offence
charged is of non-imprisonable nature or the alleged offender, when convicted is entitled to non
custodial punishment. However conditions could be imposed in such cases and their breach may
make the person liable to be arrested and put into custody27.

Two important aspects of bail process must be taken into consideration while formulating a new
bail law. They are : (a) the police power to grant bail (b) the police power to arrest and seek

26
Wani Afsal & Verma S.K., Right to Bail, Indian Law Institute, New Delhi, 2000
27
Janak Raj Jai, Bail Law and Procedures, Third edition, Universal Law Publishing, New Delhi, 2004

15
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

remand. In case of the former, the law may specifically provide for the grant of police bail in
cases of arrest under a warrant, unless the release is imprudent on grounds that may be recorded.
This principle can be made applicable to summary offences as well. The right to be bailed in the
above cases may be accompanied by a police right to ask for a surety. In the latter case, where
initial police arrest is either illegal or without a warrant, police request for the grant of remand
should be given consideration only on the basis of the guidelines which must be legislatively
provided in the code.

The procedure for bail hearing needs specific treatment. The court may be empowered to
conduct any bail hearing in private. It may also be empowered to conduct any bail hearing in
private. It may also be empowered to receive such information or material as may be relevant
despite the question of its admissibility under the rules of evidence. Another major area that calls
for considerations is about the surety – an important component of the bail process. The
substituting of surety by newer ventures, as disclosed by the Manhattan Bail Project or by the
hostel system for undertrials as obtains in some Scandanavian countries, can also be taken note
of for purposes of experimentation in certain cases. The duration, variation and revocation of bail
order also require elaboration particularly with a view to enable a prosecutor to apply for
variation of the terms of conditions of bail granted, or where the breach of or likely breach of
conditions become imminent to cause difficulties for those entrusted to assist the courts of justice
in the fulfillment of their obligations to speedy trial28.

In sum the reformulation of bail law is not a mere revision of the law. It is a prelude to any
commitment to reform the administration of criminal justice. The reform calls for garnering total
efforts. Concerned agencies of state and the government cannot ignore it for long; but prior to the
undertaking of any reform it is essential that the job of systematization and analysis is completed.
These are necessary prerequisites for any effort to draft a code. Therefore an intense debate has
to precede before the new law is codified with advantage even at the cost of impairing the rule of
law as presently assured by the existing law.

28
Ibid

16
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

CONCLUSION

The object and purpose of bail have always been intelligible in the criminal law jurisprudence.
The perspectives are at times lost and the bail process has either been used to give an over
emphasis either to the liberty of the individual or to the security of the state. The mal functioning
of the administrative machinery and its loose control over the law enforcement agencies have
brought to the fore instances where judicial action to protect personal liberty in the wake of the
governing awareness of human rights has hardly be

en a redeeming feature. This approach has resulted in some imbalances in the mechanism,
system and process of bail, which is vital component of the machinery geared to serve the ends
of criminal justice. This perspective has to remain constantly in view while understanding the
working of the bail system.

The law on bail as legislatively enacted is poorly drafted, leaving broadly the system to be build
by the enforcement agencies themselves, which they have been doing till date.

The inclusion of provisions like anticipatory bail in the scheme of bail system is according to
some critics an anomaly because of semi assimilation of this concept with the ordinary concept
of bail. It is being suggested that the provisions of anticipatory bail be kept out of the domain of
bail altogether. However the withdrawal of the scheme will not be justified in anyway.

In sum the confusion in the concept of bail and also in the working of the bail system is largely
the result of a basic misunderstanding of the concept and the lack of its proper formulation under
the Code. A new law on the subject alone can rectify the errors. However a proper functioning of
the bail process in our legal system should guarantee the existence of changed social facts, which
may be prerequisites for a successful functioning of the bail system.

17
 ROLE OF COURTS IN GRANTING BAIL AND BAIL REFORMS

REFERENCES

BOOKS REFERRED

1. Janak Raj Jai, Bail Law and Procedures, Third edition, Universal Law Publishing, New Delhi.
2. Wani Afsal & Verma S.K., Right to Bail, Indian Law Institute, New Delhi, 2000.
3. Ratanlal Dhirajlal, Criminal Procedure Code (1999) Universal, Delhi.
4. Chandrasekharan Pillai (ed.) Kelkar's Outlines of Criminal Procedure (2001), Eastern
Book House, Lucknow.

18