JURISPRUDENCE I

INDIVIDUAL LIBERTY v. SOCIETAL INTEREST

In Light of the Evolution of Bail Jurisprudence in India

Presented By
S.Sadhana
20020
Group 4
Individual rights v. Societal interest debate
in Sociological school of Jurisprudence

 The debate of individual rights v. collective interests of society

– extremely relevant in present times
 Jurists like Ihering and Pound have placed societal interests
over individual interest.
 Ihering was against the theory of individuals welfare and
favors the factor that social interest of society must have a
priority over an individual’s interest and the purpose of the law
is to protect the interest of society.
 The ultimate purpose of law is to serve the society
 Under trials in India

•National Crime Records

Bureau, there are a total of
3, 30,487 under trials

•Rate of conviction: 48.8 %

•69.3 percent of under trials

are illiterate or semi literate,
from socially and
economically backward
communities.
Bail System in India

 Definition: Procuring the release of a person from

legal custody, by undertaking that they shall appear at
the time and place designated and submit themselves
to the jurisdiction and judgment of the court
 Bail system governed by Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (CrPC) under sections 436 to 450
 Offences classified as bailable and non bailable
offences
 Types: regular bail, interim bail anticipatory bail
‘Bail not Jail’ - Bail System and Under trial prisoners

Courts saw bail as a system to balance individual

liberty and safety of society,
Courts stress on ‘Presumption of Innocence’
according to our courts, ‘bail is the rule and jail is the
exception’
268th Law Commission Report states: rich and
influential are able to procure bail with ease while the
poor people suffer behind bars
Though an accused is presumed to be innocent, an alarming number of
individuals are detained for years without a trial.
Arbitrary detention takes a mental and financial toll
Under trials languish in jails not being able to afford bail
Arrest under special laws such as UAPA makes it impossible to get bail.

Judicial discretion in bail adjudication

In bailable offence, bail can be claimed as a matter of right. In non bailable
offence, it is completely left to the mercy of judges.
Judicial discretion must be exercised in a compassionate and humane manner
But in number of cases, we see lower courts have been exercising the
discretionary power vested in them to reject bail in cases that involves petty
crimes
Judgments such as recent Thwaha Faisal v. Union of India provide a ray of
hope.
 Criminal justice system is in dire need of bail reforms
 Retd Justice B.S.Chauhan observed existing system of bail
in India is inadequate and inefficient to accomplish its
purpose
 Process of arrest must become more rational, transparent
and fair
 establishment of bail fund
 entire prison infrastructure in the country must be revamped
 speedy and fair trial
 In the name of societal interest, thousands of individuals are
behind bars, this shows that the bail regime and criminal
justice system in our country must change