Bail Order Shouldn’t Be Normally Stayed During Pendency Of Application To Cancel Bail : Supreme Court

In an important judgment, the Hon’ble Supreme Court on Tuesday (July 23) held that bail orders should not be normally stayed.

Setting aside an order of the Delhi High Court which stayed the bail granted in a money laundering case, the Court stated that bail orders can be stayed only in exceptional circumstances.

The Court’s conclusions are :

1. In an application made under Section 439(2) of the CrPC or Section 483(3) of the BNSS or other proceedings filed seeking cancellation of bail, the power to grant an interim stay of operation of order to bail can be exercised only in exceptional cases when a very strong prima facie case of the existence of the grounds for cancellation of bail is made out. While granting a stay of an order of grant of bail, the Court must record brief reasons for coming to a conclusion that the case was an exceptional one and a strong prima facie case is made out;
2. As a normal rule, the ex­parte stay of the bail order should not be granted. The said power can be exercised only in rare and very exceptional cases where the situation demands the passing of such drastic order. Where such a drastic ex­parte order of stay is passed, it is the duty of the Court to immediately hear the accused on the prayer for continuation of the interim relief. When the Court exercises the power of granting ex­parte ad interim stay of an order granting bail, the Court is duty bound to record reasons why it came to the conclusion that it was a very rare and exceptional case where a drastic order of ex­parte interim stay was warranted.

VANYA BAJAJ (ADVOCATE)