REGULAR BAIL AND REMAND IN ANTICIPARUTY BAIL

REGULAR BAIL AND REMAND IN ANTICIPARUTY BAIL:-Every citizen of India has a fundamental right of freedom under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution . Since we are governed by the rule of law , freedom of every individual within the territory of India is subject to the rule of law. In other words, if any individual violates the rule of the land, he is bound to face consequences under the law and in such a case, his freedom can be restricted. Whenever any person, arrested by police approaches the court to release him on bail , it is the solemn and bounded duty of court to decide his bail application at the earliest by a reasoned order. The Hon’ble Bombay High Court has even circulated circular no. A.1211/2009, where it states that the Hon’ble High Court in Cr. Writ Petition no. 18/09 has observed that judges of subordinate courts do not decide bail application within reasonable period of time. By virtue of above circular all judicial officers are directed to dispose off bail applications as expeditiously as possible and to comply with that direction. In view of above constitutional provision and the circular referred to above, it is duty of every judicial officer not to be responsible for delay in disposing off bail application.Above circular is circulated in the year 2009 in the South Goa District, vide letter bearing no. 20-10-2009. There are two types of offences, bailable and non bailable governed by sections 436 and 437 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. ( for short Said Code).
LEGALITY OF DIRECTION TO POLICE TO GIVE ADVANCE NOTICE BEFORE REGISTERING OFFENC IN ANTICIPARUTY BAIL APPLICATION :- The Hon’ble Supreme Court in case of Guruchand Singh v/s State ( Delhi Administration ) ( AIR 1978 SC 179) has laid down factors to be taken into consideration while granting bail and they are as follows: The nature and gravity of circumstances in which the offence is committed, the position and status of accused with reference to the victim and the witnesses, the likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice of repeating the offence of jeopardizing his own life being faced with a grim prospect of possible conviction in the case of tempering with witnesses, the history of the case as well 5 as of it investigation and other relevant grounds which in view of so many variable factors cannot be exhaustively set out.
REMAND:- 1) Efforts must be made by the Investigating Officer to complete the investigation within 24hours as fixed by section 57 of the Said Code. 2) If such completion is not possible and there are grounds for believing that the accusation/information is well founded the officer must forthwith forward the accused to the nearest Judicial Magistrate with a copy of the relevant entries. 3) The Magistrate, who receives such information, may authorize the detention of the accused for a maximum period of 15 days whether or not he has jurisdiction to try the case. 4) Such detention during the initial period of 15 days may be either in judicial custody or in police custody is the discretion of the Magistrate. Magistrate having no jurisdiction must forward the accused to the . 5) Beyond the period of 15 days, there cannot be any remand to police custody. 6) Thereafter, if the Magistrate having jurisdiction is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for doing so, the Magistrate may authorize the detention of the accused otherwise than in police custody for a period of 15 days at a time. Such detention cannot exceed the total period of 90 days or 60 days as the case may be. 7) If within the said period of 90 days or 60 days the final report is not filed, the accused has an indefeasible right to be released form custody. 8) Thereafter he can be remanded to custody by the Magistrate only of he is not in a position to offer bail. 69) When the accused is so released under the proviso to Sec. 167(2) of the Said Code , it shall be deemed that such release is under Chapter 33 of the Code.10) Such bail is also liable to be cancelle