Judicial Sensitivity and Diligence in Bail Applications: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir's Emphasis on Avoiding the 'Copy-Paste Syndrome'
The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has emphasized the necessity for judicial sensitivity and diligence in dealing with bail applications. Justice Sanjay Dhar, in a significant ruling, criticized the "copy-paste syndrome" that has infiltrated judicial proceedings, asserting that such practices compromise the fundamental rights of individuals.
The observations were made in a plea involving Umar Bashir Khan, who sought bail in connection with an FIR registered under Sections 451, 376/511, 354, and 506 of the Ranbir Penal Code (RPC). The allegations against Khan included trespassing into the prosecutrix's house, assaulting her, attempting sexual assault, and issuing life threats. The incident allegedly occurred during the night of December 5–6, 2018, following which the prosecutrix filed a complaint and her statement was recorded under Section 164 of the CrPC. A chargesheet was subsequently filed in 2021.
Trial Court's Approach Criticized
While seeking bail, the petitioner highlighted that the prosecutrix had resiled from her earlier allegations during her testimony in court, attributing the incident to a family dispute. Despite this, the trial court rejected Khan's bail plea in September 2024, relying on an entirely unrelated narrative that the petitioner had sexually exploited the prosecutrix under the pretext of marriage—a claim that had no connection to the case at hand.
Justice Dhar expressed strong disapproval of the trial court's handling of the bail application. “From a perusal of the order passed by the trial court, it appears that the said court has decided the bail application of the petitioner on the basis of facts of some other case,” he remarked, adding that such a casual approach was unimaginable for an officer of the level of a Sessions Judge.
The High Court noted that the prosecutrix’s testimony contradicted her initial allegations, creating reasonable doubt about the petitioner’s involvement in the alleged offense of attempted rape. Justice Dhar observed that, at most, the petitioner could be implicated for criminal trespass, which is not a heinous offense. Highlighting the fundamental rights of the accused, the judgment stated, “Even a single day’s delay in granting bail to a person who is otherwise entitled to it amounts to violation of his fundamental right to life and liberty.” The court stressed that subordinate courts must remain vigilant and avoid mechanical approaches, especially in cases involving personal liberty.
Broader Guidance to Subordinate Courts
Granting bail to the petitioner with a bond of ₹25,000, Justice Dhar used the opportunity to issue broader guidance to subordinate courts. He directed that courts must remain sensitive and avoid the pitfalls of a copy-paste approach in deciding bail applications. “It is impressed upon the criminal courts to remain sensitive and careful while dealing with bail applications and avoid the copy-paste syndrome which, of late, has crept into the functioning of the courts,” Justice Dhar concluded.
Cause Title: Umar Bashir Khan Vs UT of J&K
Case No: Bail Application No. 104/2024
Date: December-24-2024
Bench: Justice Sanjay Dhar
[Read/Download order]
