# application for bail a copy of the order passed by the Magistrate in the same matter, the

- **Citation:** C.L. No. 42/VIIb-47
- **Court:** Allahabad High Court
- **Decided:** 1977-03-08
- **Case number:** C.L. No. 42/VIIb-47
- **Source:** https://unisonlegal.in/judgment/allahabad-high-court/application-for-bail-a-copy-of-the-order-passed-by-the-magistrate-in-the-same-163329
- **Pages:** 2

## Text

228
C.L. No. 42/VIIb-47 dated 8th March, 1977

In order to enable a party applying for bail in the sessions court to annex to his
application for bail a copy of the order passed by the Magistrate in the same matter, the
Magistrates shall, while recording their order refusing bail, prepare a copy of such order
by placing a carbon and paper below the paper on which they write the order in their own
hand and deliver the same free of cost to the counsel for the accused immediately.
Similarly a carbon copy of the order refusing bail shall also be prepared by the Sessions
Judges and delivered free of cost to the counsel for the accused immediately so that the
same may be annexed to the application for bail made to the High Court.
C.L. No. 10/VIIb-47 dated 20th January, 1976

The District and Sessions Judges are authorized to transfer bail applications to the
Additional District and Sessions Judges as and when they consider expedient or
necessary.
C.L. No. 145/VIIb-47 dated 19th December, 1979

The Sessions Judges and the Magistrates should insist that in applications for bail
the fact whether the accused has obtained bail or has moved an application for bail in any
other case or otherwise should be clearly stated.
C.L. No. 37/VIIb-47-Admn.(G) dated 25th August, 1988
All the District & Sessions Judges should henceforth ensure that the second bail
application must state whether or not bail of the applicant has been rejected by the High
Court or the Court of Sessions.
C.L. No. 95/IVf-69 dated 14th September, 1978

Attention of all the Presiding Officers is invited to the decision of Supreme Court
concerning bail matter in case of Moti Ram and others Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
reported in 1978 Cr.L.J. 1703
C.L. No. 84/IXf-69 Admn. (G) dated 29th October, 1980

It brings to the notice of all Presiding Officers that in Writ Petition No. 57 of
1979 : Hussainara Khatoon and others vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna Dated
12.2.1979, (reported in AIR 1979 Supreme Court 1360) in the context of pretrial release
of accused persons, Hon'ble the Supreme Court has observed that if the court is satisfied
after taking into account, on the basis of information placed before it, that the accused
has his roots in the community and is not likely to abscond it can safely release the
accused on his personal bond. To determine whether the accused has his roots in the
community which would deter him from fleeing, the court should take into account the
following factors concerning the accused:-
1.
the length of his residence in the community,
2.
his employment status, history and his financial condition,
3.
his family ties and relationships,
4.
his reputation, character and monetary condition,
5.
his prior criminal record including any record of prior release on
recognizance or on bail,
229
6.
the identity of responsible members of the community who would vouch
for his reliability,
7.
the nature of the offence charged and the apparent probability of
conviction and the likely sentence in so far as these factors are relevant to
the risk of non appearance and ,
8.
any other factors indicating the ties of the accused to the community or
bearing on the risk of willful failure to appear.
C.L. No. 64/VIIIh-23 dated 13th June, 1979

Whenever the courts pass orders for bail, the readers should mention the name of
Public Prosecutor, Assistant Public Prosecutor or D.G.C. or A.D.G.C. (Criminal) or
Panel lawyer who do not oppose petitions for bail or admit any material fact pleaded in
the bail petitions benefiting the accused.
C.L. No. 53/VIIb-47/Admn.(G) dated 25th August, 1989

The Court has noticed that the orders passed on a bail application by the Sessions
Court are not tagged with the record of Sessions Trial depriving the Prosecution to take
the benefit of statements given at the time of grant of bail by the defence and at the time
of trial of criminal cases. According to rule 24 of General Rules (Criminal) 1977, every
paper in the case from the information on which cognizance was first taken, up to and
including the warrant received back under section 430 of the Cr.P.C., are the contents of
the record.

Therefore, all the presiding officers are directed to keep on record copies of the
orders passed on bail applications.
(ii)
Refusal of bail by the police
C.L. No. 14/VII-b-47, dated 17th February, 1968

In order to check deliberate refusal of acceptance of bail in a bailable offence by
the investigating Police Officers, though offered by the accused persons, it is necessary
that in cases where the Magistrate finds that there has been an unjustifiable refusal the
matter should be brought to the notice of the Government for necessary action.
(iii)
Bail or parole refused by superior court
C.L. No. 148/VIIIb-47, dated 21st September, 1974
Subordinate courts should grant bail or parole sparingly and only in exceptional
circumstances after the same has been refused by the superior court in cases where;
(1)
a different stage in the proceedings has been reached at which different
considerations arise for the grant or refusal of bail, or
(2)
new grounds appear subsequently which were not available at the time of
the refusal of bail by the superior court and such new grounds make out a
case for the grant of bail.
Requirements of Section 437, Cr.P.C., in such cases, should be fulfilled and
reasons for granting bail or parole should be recorded. Orders of bail in cases beyond the
territorial jurisdiction of the court should not be passed.