Supreme Court cautions judges against moral judgements in bail cases

The Supreme Court has held that judges must refrain from imposing their personal views or moral judgements while deciding bail applications or conducting criminal trials, emphasising that judicial decisions should not be influenced by individual perceptions of morality.

A bench comprising Justices Ujjal Bhuyan and A S Chandurkar made the observation while setting aside a Madhya Pradesh High Court order that had denied bail to an accused in a sexual assault case, citing possible consequences for social order and the morality of the victim's family.

'Personal morality cannot guide judicial decisions'

In its September 23 order, the apex court expressed disagreement with the reasoning adopted by the high court, which had rejected the accused's bail application on March 20. The Supreme Court noted that the high court had considered the potential implications of granting bail for social order and the morals of the victim's family.

"We are of the view that courts should refrain from imposing the personal views or value judgement of the Presiding Judge on morality or otherwise while adjudicating a matter relating to bail, or even a criminal trial of an accused," the bench observed.

Sexual assault allegations and defence arguments

The case originated in Madhya Pradesh's Ratlam district, where the accused was booked under various provisions of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act, 2012, and the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.

According to the allegations, the accused, a married man who lived as a tenant in the victim's neighbourhood, had attempted to abduct the victim's elder sister, resulting in the registration of a criminal case. Subsequently, the victim informed her mother that the accused had sexually exploited her for approximately a month, leading to the registration of the present case.

During the proceedings, counsel representing the accused disputed the allegations and maintained that the criminal case arose from his client's relationship with the victim's elder sister. The defence contended that the complaint had been lodged to harass the accused over his involvement with the elder daughter.

Prolonged incarceration considered

While examining the bail application, the Supreme Court took into account the period already spent by the accused in judicial custody and the likelihood of further delays in completing the trial.

The bench observed that the accused had remained incarcerated for more than a year and that the criminal proceedings would require additional time to conclude. Considering these circumstances, it concluded that sufficient grounds existed to grant bail.

The Supreme Court consequently overturned the high court's order and directed that the accused be produced before the jurisdictional special court within a maximum of seven days. It ordered his release on bail, subject to the terms and conditions considered appropriate by the special court.