Summary
The Supreme Court granted regular bail in a prosecution alleging forged property documents supplied for an earlier bail bond. Police had twice filed closure reports, yet the appellant had spent over a year in custody. In these peculiar circumstances, non-acceptance of the second report by the trial court and uncertainty about witness examination did not justify continued detention. The order granted bail without deciding discharge or acceptance of the closure report.
Issues
- Whether continued detention was justified despite two police closure reports and the period already spent in custody.
Held
- Bail decisions concern personal liberty and must not be made mechanically. In the peculiar circumstances of two closure reports, the High Court should not have rejected bail merely because the trial court had yet to accept the second report. (¶¶ 6, 7)
- Examination of witnesses depended on the fate of the second closure report. Having regard to the allegations and custody already undergone, immediate release on regular bail was warranted. (¶ 7)
Result
Appeal allowed; High Court bail refusal set aside. Interim bail made absolute as regular bail on the bonds already furnished to the trial court’s satisfaction.