Source: Supreme Court

Why in News?

Justice CT Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar has observed and stressed the need for listing bail applications pertaining to the same First Information Report (FIR) before one single bench in order to avoid conflicting decisions, especially in cases where parity becomes the grounds for which bail is sought.

• The Supreme Court gave this judgment in the case of Rajpal v. State of Rajasthan.

What is the Background of Rajpal v. State of Rajasthan?

• The SC expressed concern at the High Courts not listing bail applications arising out of the same FIR before the same bench, despite repeated orders.
  • A similar situation was observed by a three-judge bench of the court on 31^st July 2023 with regards to listing bail matters relating to the same FIR before different judges in the Allahabad High Court, wherein the bench considered it appropriate to ask the HC to avoid anomaly in such listings.
• The learned judges in the order grant bail and some other judges refuse to grant bail, even when the role attributed to the applicants is almost similar.
• Addressing the recurring pattern across other HCs, the court directed the Registrar (Judicial) of the Registry of the SC to communicate, the matter briefly pertained to the petitioner who had been arrayed in an FIR wherein the co-accused was granted bail by a ‘Coordinate Bench of Rajasthan HC’, while the bench at Jaipur had rejected his bail, even though the petitioner claimed grounds of parity.
• While the Special Leave Petition (SLP) was permitted to be withdrawn, the same was dismissed in terms of the signed order.

What was the Court’s Observation?

• The SC reiterate the concern of lethargy in following the earlier orders in the matter of dealing with bail applications arising out of the same FIR was to avoid conflicting decisions.
• It is not to be construed that parity be given in all circumstances to all co-accused and that ‘such entitlement is certainly dependent on various relevant facts and factors.