Summary
Lengthy incarceration and parity did not justify bail pending appeal for two convicted men where material subsequent conduct—alleged murder of their escorting constable, absconding and armed resistance to arrest—had not been placed before the High Court. Their comparators had different roles and no involvement in that incident. Bail was cancelled for Chandra Kumar and Rishi Kumar, but preserved for Arvind Kumar, who was not charge-sheeted in the constable’s murder.
Issues
- Whether incarceration exceeding ten years and co-accused parity justified the challenged appellate bail grants.
- Whether the three respondents’ differing subsequent conduct required distinct outcomes.
Provisions considered
- Sections 302/149, 147, 148 and 120B, Indian Penal Code, 1860The respondents’ life-sentence convictions supplied the setting for bail pending their appeals; this judgment distinguished their later conduct without deciding those appeals’ merits. (¶¶ 2, 3, 6, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14)
Held
- The High Court relied on time served and bail granted to two co-accused without being informed of material later events involving Chandra Kumar and Rishi Kumar. Allegations of killing an escorting constable, absconding and firing at arresting police were relevant to bail despite their separate pending trial. (¶¶ 7, 8, 10, 11, 12)
- Parity with the two bailed co-accused failed because their roles differed and they were not involved in the later constable-murder case. On this record, incarceration beyond ten years did not outweigh the two respondents’ subsequent conduct. These observations did not adjudicate guilt in that separate case. (¶¶ 11, 12)
- Arvind Kumar was not charge-sheeted in the constable-murder case, and the Court declined to disturb his bail. The appeal against him was dismissed, while the appeals against Chandra Kumar and Rishi Kumar were allowed and their bail set aside. (¶¶ 13, 14)
- Chandra Kumar and Rishi Kumar were given two weeks to surrender, failing which the High Court must take permissible coercive steps to secure custody. (¶ 14)
Result
Appeal against Arvind Kumar dismissed, preserving his bail. Appeals against Chandra Kumar and Rishi Kumar allowed; bail set aside and surrender within two weeks directed, failing lawful coercive custody measures.