In a recent ruling (Ajay Kumar Yadav vs State of Uttar Pradesh and ors), the Supreme Court underscored the necessity for a more stringent approach when considering bail requests from police officials accused in custodial death cases.
Justices Aniruddha Bose and PV Sanjay Kumar emphasized that this stricter stance is warranted due in part to the potentially greater influence wielded by members of law enforcement.
“In cases of this nature, having regard to the overall influence a member of a police force may wield in connection with a case against them pertaining to custodial death, a stricter view is to be taken on the question of granting bail,” the Court stated.
The Court further emphasized the gravity of custodial deaths as offenses, while revoking the bail previously granted to a police constable implicated in a 2021 custodial death.
“While ordinarily, we would not invoke our jurisdiction under Article 136 of the Constitution of India to invalidate an order granting bail to an accused, this criterion does not apply in cases of custodial death involving police officials as accused. Such alleged offenses are of grave and serious nature,” the Court remarked.
In February 2021, nineteen police officials were implicated in the death of a man arrested on suspicion of robbery. Among them was a police constable who was serving as a temporary driver when the incident occurred.
The constable was granted bail by the Allahabad High Court in 2023, following the filing of a chargesheet in the case. However, the deceased man’s brother challenged this decision in the Supreme Court, arguing that the constable’s bail should be cancelled.
The Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), which was probing the case, supported the appellant’s plea to revoke the constable’s bail.
The Supreme Court noted that the constable’s role was not limited to that of a driver, as suggested by the High Court. It emphasized the need for a stricter approach in granting bail, given the influence wielded by police officers and the seriousness of the offense.
Considering the gravity of the charges under Section 302 (murder) of the Indian Penal Code and the short period between the constable’s detention and bail, the Court concluded that the bail was improperly granted.
As a result, the constable was directed to surrender to the CBI within a month and be taken into judicial custody. The Court clarified that its decision did not comment on the merits of the case, but was based solely on the question of bail.
