AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Gita Gopi, J
RULE. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor waives service of notice of rule on behalf of the respondent State.
This application is preferred through jail seeking temporary bail for 60 days on the ground of the prevailing pandemic situation.
Heard the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and perused the material on record.
In the application, the ground cited by the applicant for temporary bail is the prevailing pandemic situation. It is notable that the Apex Court in Suo
Motu Writ Petition No.1 of 2020 dated 20.03.2020, In Re : Contagion of Covid-19 Virus in Prison, has issued directions for the reduction of over-
crowding of prisoners with a view to protect their health in the context of the prevailing pandemic situation. Guidelines were framed to identify cases
where the inmates could be released on temporary / interim bail for a period of Two Months or till such time that the State Government withdrew the
Notification issued under the Epidemics Act, 1897, whichever is earlier. Exceptions were also set out to identify cases where the inmates could not be
granted such benefit. Paragraph-2(10) of the Minutes of the High Power Committee reads as under:-
“10. A jail inmate who has been convicted by the Court of Sessions and directed him to undergo imprisonment for less than 7 years may prefer an
application for temporary bail for the period of two months, before the Hon'ble High Court. All these temporary bail applications shall be decided
through the Video Conference.â€
In pursuance of the above directions of the Apex Court, a High Power Committee was constituted in the year 2020. Following the Resolution
passed by the High Power Committee, several inmates were identified for their release on temporary / interim bail for a period of Two Months or till
such time that the State Government withdrew the Notification issued under the Epidemics Act, 1897, whichever is earlier. One of the conditions laid
down in the Resolution of the High Power Committee was that the jail inmate should not have been convicted for an offence for which the sentence
of imprisonment is for a period of more than Seven Years subject to the condition that the inmate is not alleged to have committed any of the offences,
which could be treated as exceptions.
In the present case, the applicant has been convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 393, 397 and 452 of IPC and has been sentenced to
undergo imprisonment for a period of less than seven years. The applicant also does not fall in any of the exceptions set out by the High Power
Committee. The appeal preferred by the applicant against his conviction is pending. Under the circumstances, this Court finds this to be a fit case
where discretion could be exercised in favour of the applicant.
In the result, the application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on temporary bail for a period of TWO MONTHS from the date of
his release or till such time that the State Government withdrew the Notification issued under the Epidemics Act, 1897, whichever is earlier, on
condition that he shall furnish personal bond in the sum of Rs.5000/- [Rupees five thousand only] to the satisfaction of the jail authority. The authorities
shall adhere to its own Circular relating to COVID-19 and, thereafter, will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other
offence for the time being. During the above period of bail, the applicant shall mark his presence before the nearest Police Station on every Monday
between 1000-1700 hrs. With the above direction, the application stands disposed of. Rule is made absolute.