Supreme Court Cancels Bail of Convicted Murderer Amidst Allegations of Political Influence

The case of Somesh Chaurasia v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. revolves around the cancellation of bail granted to the second respondent, who was convicted of murder under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Supreme Court overturned the Madhya Pradesh High Court’s decision to maintain bail, citing severe lapses in law enforcement and political influence shielding the accused.

Background of the Case

The second respondent was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. However, the High Court suspended his sentence under Section 389(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) and granted him bail. During this period, another FIR (No. 143/2019) was registered, alleging that the second respondent had murdered the appellant’s father. Despite this, the High Court declined to revoke the bail, leading the appellant to approach the Supreme Court.

Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner argued that:

The second respondent had a long history of violent crimes, including previous murder convictions.
Despite multiple FIRs and court summons, the accused had evaded arrest, allegedly due to political backing.
There was compelling evidence that the second respondent was involved in another murder while out on bail.
Law enforcement agencies failed to execute arrest warrants and actively shielded the accused.

Respondents’ Arguments

The State of Madhya Pradesh and the second respondent contended:

The High Court had directed an investigation, and no final conclusion had been reached regarding the second respondent’s involvement in the new murder case.
The accused was falsely implicated due to political rivalry.
The second respondent’s spouse, an MLA, had merely requested security due to threats, which was granted by the State.
The police had tried to arrest the accused, but he had absconded, making it difficult to execute the warrant.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court took a strong stance against the accused’s continued evasion of the law and the failure of state authorities to arrest him. The judgment stated:

“The rule of law must be preserved. The accused has been protected by political influence, and law enforcement has been complicit in his evasion. The failure to act has resulted in a breakdown of justice, which this Court cannot condone.”

The Court highlighted the following key points:

The accused had multiple murder convictions and was granted bail despite a strong likelihood of committing further offenses.
Despite a warrant and a proclamation, law enforcement delayed taking action, allowing the accused to evade justice.
The trial judge had expressed concerns over political interference, raising doubts about the impartiality of the state machinery.
The accused was eventually arrested only after the Supreme Court issued a stern warning to law enforcement.

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court canceled the bail granted to the second respondent and ordered his immediate transfer to another jail to ensure a fair trial. The Court also directed an administrative inquiry into allegations of judicial interference and police misconduct.

Impact of the Judgment

This ruling has significant legal and administrative implications:

Strengthening Judicial Independence: The verdict reinforces the protection of trial judges from political pressure.
Reaffirming Bail Principles: It establishes that individuals with severe criminal records should not be granted bail without thorough scrutiny.
Holding Law Enforcement Accountable: The ruling underscores that police complicity in shielding criminals will not be tolerated.
Preserving Public Confidence: By upholding the rule of law, the judgment restores faith in the judicial system.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in Somesh Chaurasia v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr. serves as a landmark ruling emphasizing that political influence and law enforcement failures cannot obstruct justice. The judgment ensures that convicted individuals cannot exploit legal loopholes to evade accountability, reinforcing the integrity of India’s criminal justice system.

Petitioner Name: Somesh Chaurasia.
Respondent Name: State of Madhya Pradesh & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud, Justice Hrishikesh Roy.
Place Of Incident: Madhya Pradesh.
Judgment Date: 22-07-2021.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: somesh-chaurasia-vs-state-of-madhya-prad-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-22-07-2021.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Murder Cases
See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Attempt to Murder Cases
See all petitions in Judgment by Dhananjaya Y Chandrachud
See all petitions in Judgment by Hrishikesh Roy
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in Remanded
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments July 2021
See all petitions in 2021 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category