Why 2-Judge Benches Hear Bail Applications? Supreme Court Questions Calcutta High Court Practice, Seeks Report

The Supreme Court recently questioned the practice of the Calcutta High Court hearing regular and anticipatory bail applications before Division Benches instead of Single Judges, as is the norm in other High Courts.“When there is a huge filing and pendency of the bail applications, we wonder why regular bail applications and anticipatory bail applications are being heard by the Division Bench of this High Court especially when in case of all other High Courts, the bail matters are being heard by the learned Single Judges. The question is whether two Hon'ble Judges of the High Court should be devoting time for dealing with regular bail applications”, the Court stated.A bench of Justice Abhay Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan sought a report from the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court explaining this practice and directed the submission of data on bail applications filed in 2024 and their pendency. “We, therefore, direct the Registrar (Judicial) of the High Court of Calcutta to place on record a report why regular bail applications/anticipatory bail applications are being heard by the Division Bench. He is directed to furnish the data of bail applications and anticipatory bail applications filed in 2024 and pendency of such applications as of today”, the Court directed.The Court gave these directions while issuing notice in a Special Leave Petition (SLP) challenging High Court's order granting bail in a murder case. As per the National Judicial Data Grid, 1039 bail pleas are pending before the Calcutta High Court, with 1 bail plea from 2019, 102 from 2022, 127 from 2023, 711 from 2024 and 98 from this year.The case before the High Court involved petitioner Safiar Hossain, who had been in custody for over one year and eleven months. The High Court noted that only eight out of 43 charge-sheeted witnesses had been examined, and there was no likelihood of the trial concluding soon. The State opposed the bail application, citing the recovery of a gun and six rounds of ammunition from the petitioner, as well as forensic evidence linking the ammunition to the bullet found in the deceased's body. The prosecution argued that the petitioner's bail had previously been rejected twice. However, the High Court observed that prolonged incarceration without trial violated the accused's fundamental right to a speedy trial and personal liberty.Granting bail on the grounds of trial delay, the High Court directed the petitioner to furnish a bond of Rs. 10,000 with two sureties. The bail application was thus allowed by the High Court.Case no. – Mahatab Ali v. State of West Bengal & Anr.Case Title – Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Diary No. 60183/2024Click Here To Read/Download Order

Why 2-Judge Benches Hear Bail Applications? Supreme Court Questions Calcutta High Court Practice, Seeks Report

Amisha Shrivastava

Tags