Question Description
Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.Black’s Law Dictionary describes ‘bail’ as procuring “the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.”In the 1973 case Supt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs v. Amiya Kumar Roy Choudhry, the Calcutta High Court explained the principle behind giving bail: “The law of bails… has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely, on one hand, the requirements of the society for being shielded from the hazards of being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime; and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence viz. the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty.”As opposed to ordinary bail, which is granted to a person who is under arrest, in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before arrest made.Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down the law on anticipatory bail. Sub-section (1) of the provision reads: “When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.”The provision empowers only the Sessions Court and High Court to grant anticipatory bail.Anticipatory bail became part of the new CrPC in 1973 (when the latter replaced the older Code of 1898), after the 41st Law Commission Report of 1969 recommended the inclusion of the provision.The report said, “The necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in jail for some days… Apart from false cases, where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond, or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail.”In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that S. 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).It also observed, “It may perhaps be right to describe the power (of anticipatory bail) as of an extraordinary character… But this does not justify the conclusion that the power must be exercised in exceptional cases only, because it is of an extra-ordinary character. We will really be saying once too often that all discretion has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on circumstances justifying its exercise.”While granting anticipatory bail, the Sessions Court or High Court can impose the conditions laid down in sub-section (2).Section 438(2) reads: “When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including —(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court”Q.Ursuala is charged with seriously injuring Aquaman( Half human half fish) . Injuring of a half human half fish is a very serious crime/nonbailable. Ursuala applies for anticipatory bail.Based on the information in the given passage, which of the following, if correct, would most strengthen Ursuala’s case?a)The principle underlying the grant of bail as envisaged in the section is that an accused person is presumed in law to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty.b)Bail being a right and not a favour and in demanding bail from accused person, the social status of the accused should be considered taking care that the amount fixed is not excessive.c)Anticipatory bail must be provided in every possible case of a person being put behind bar.d)It is a non bailable offence and Ursuala makes himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? for CLAT 2024 is part of CLAT preparation. The Question and answers have been prepared according to the CLAT exam syllabus. Information about Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.Black’s Law Dictionary describes ‘bail’ as procuring “the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.”In the 1973 case Supt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs v. Amiya Kumar Roy Choudhry, the Calcutta High Court explained the principle behind giving bail: “The law of bails… has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely, on one hand, the requirements of the society for being shielded from the hazards of being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime; and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence viz. the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty.”As opposed to ordinary bail, which is granted to a person who is under arrest, in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before arrest made.Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down the law on anticipatory bail. Sub-section (1) of the provision reads: “When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.”The provision empowers only the Sessions Court and High Court to grant anticipatory bail.Anticipatory bail became part of the new CrPC in 1973 (when the latter replaced the older Code of 1898), after the 41st Law Commission Report of 1969 recommended the inclusion of the provision.The report said, “The necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in jail for some days… Apart from false cases, where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond, or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail.”In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that S. 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).It also observed, “It may perhaps be right to describe the power (of anticipatory bail) as of an extraordinary character… But this does not justify the conclusion that the power must be exercised in exceptional cases only, because it is of an extra-ordinary character. We will really be saying once too often that all discretion has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on circumstances justifying its exercise.”While granting anticipatory bail, the Sessions Court or High Court can impose the conditions laid down in sub-section (2).Section 438(2) reads: “When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including —(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court”Q.Ursuala is charged with seriously injuring Aquaman( Half human half fish) . Injuring of a half human half fish is a very serious crime/nonbailable. Ursuala applies for anticipatory bail.Based on the information in the given passage, which of the following, if correct, would most strengthen Ursuala’s case?a)The principle underlying the grant of bail as envisaged in the section is that an accused person is presumed in law to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty.b)Bail being a right and not a favour and in demanding bail from accused person, the social status of the accused should be considered taking care that the amount fixed is not excessive.c)Anticipatory bail must be provided in every possible case of a person being put behind bar.d)It is a non bailable offence and Ursuala makes himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? covers all topics & solutions for CLAT 2024 Exam. Find important definitions, questions, meanings, examples, exercises and tests below for Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.Black’s Law Dictionary describes ‘bail’ as procuring “the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.”In the 1973 case Supt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs v. Amiya Kumar Roy Choudhry, the Calcutta High Court explained the principle behind giving bail: “The law of bails… has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely, on one hand, the requirements of the society for being shielded from the hazards of being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime; and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence viz. the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty.”As opposed to ordinary bail, which is granted to a person who is under arrest, in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before arrest made.Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down the law on anticipatory bail. Sub-section (1) of the provision reads: “When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.”The provision empowers only the Sessions Court and High Court to grant anticipatory bail.Anticipatory bail became part of the new CrPC in 1973 (when the latter replaced the older Code of 1898), after the 41st Law Commission Report of 1969 recommended the inclusion of the provision.The report said, “The necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in jail for some days… Apart from false cases, where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond, or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail.”In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that S. 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).It also observed, “It may perhaps be right to describe the power (of anticipatory bail) as of an extraordinary character… But this does not justify the conclusion that the power must be exercised in exceptional cases only, because it is of an extra-ordinary character. We will really be saying once too often that all discretion has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on circumstances justifying its exercise.”While granting anticipatory bail, the Sessions Court or High Court can impose the conditions laid down in sub-section (2).Section 438(2) reads: “When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including —(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court”Q.Ursuala is charged with seriously injuring Aquaman( Half human half fish) . Injuring of a half human half fish is a very serious crime/nonbailable. Ursuala applies for anticipatory bail.Based on the information in the given passage, which of the following, if correct, would most strengthen Ursuala’s case?a)The principle underlying the grant of bail as envisaged in the section is that an accused person is presumed in law to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty.b)Bail being a right and not a favour and in demanding bail from accused person, the social status of the accused should be considered taking care that the amount fixed is not excessive.c)Anticipatory bail must be provided in every possible case of a person being put behind bar.d)It is a non bailable offence and Ursuala makes himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?.

Solutions for Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.Black’s Law Dictionary describes ‘bail’ as procuring “the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.”In the 1973 case Supt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs v. Amiya Kumar Roy Choudhry, the Calcutta High Court explained the principle behind giving bail: “The law of bails… has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely, on one hand, the requirements of the society for being shielded from the hazards of being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime; and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence viz. the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty.”As opposed to ordinary bail, which is granted to a person who is under arrest, in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before arrest made.Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down the law on anticipatory bail. Sub-section (1) of the provision reads: “When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.”The provision empowers only the Sessions Court and High Court to grant anticipatory bail.Anticipatory bail became part of the new CrPC in 1973 (when the latter replaced the older Code of 1898), after the 41st Law Commission Report of 1969 recommended the inclusion of the provision.The report said, “The necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in jail for some days… Apart from false cases, where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond, or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail.”In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that S. 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).It also observed, “It may perhaps be right to describe the power (of anticipatory bail) as of an extraordinary character… But this does not justify the conclusion that the power must be exercised in exceptional cases only, because it is of an extra-ordinary character. We will really be saying once too often that all discretion has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on circumstances justifying its exercise.”While granting anticipatory bail, the Sessions Court or High Court can impose the conditions laid down in sub-section (2).Section 438(2) reads: “When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including —(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court”Q.Ursuala is charged with seriously injuring Aquaman( Half human half fish) . Injuring of a half human half fish is a very serious crime/nonbailable. Ursuala applies for anticipatory bail.Based on the information in the given passage, which of the following, if correct, would most strengthen Ursuala’s case?a)The principle underlying the grant of bail as envisaged in the section is that an accused person is presumed in law to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty.b)Bail being a right and not a favour and in demanding bail from accused person, the social status of the accused should be considered taking care that the amount fixed is not excessive.c)Anticipatory bail must be provided in every possible case of a person being put behind bar.d)It is a non bailable offence and Ursuala makes himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? in English & in Hindi are available as part of our courses for CLAT. Download more important topics, notes, lectures and mock test series for CLAT Exam by signing up for free.

Here you can find the meaning of Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.Black’s Law Dictionary describes ‘bail’ as procuring “the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.”In the 1973 case Supt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs v. Amiya Kumar Roy Choudhry, the Calcutta High Court explained the principle behind giving bail: “The law of bails… has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely, on one hand, the requirements of the society for being shielded from the hazards of being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime; and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence viz. the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty.”As opposed to ordinary bail, which is granted to a person who is under arrest, in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before arrest made.Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down the law on anticipatory bail. Sub-section (1) of the provision reads: “When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.”The provision empowers only the Sessions Court and High Court to grant anticipatory bail.Anticipatory bail became part of the new CrPC in 1973 (when the latter replaced the older Code of 1898), after the 41st Law Commission Report of 1969 recommended the inclusion of the provision.The report said, “The necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in jail for some days… Apart from false cases, where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond, or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail.”In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that S. 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).It also observed, “It may perhaps be right to describe the power (of anticipatory bail) as of an extraordinary character… But this does not justify the conclusion that the power must be exercised in exceptional cases only, because it is of an extra-ordinary character. We will really be saying once too often that all discretion has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on circumstances justifying its exercise.”While granting anticipatory bail, the Sessions Court or High Court can impose the conditions laid down in sub-section (2).Section 438(2) reads: “When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including —(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court”Q.Ursuala is charged with seriously injuring Aquaman( Half human half fish) . Injuring of a half human half fish is a very serious crime/nonbailable. Ursuala applies for anticipatory bail.Based on the information in the given passage, which of the following, if correct, would most strengthen Ursuala’s case?a)The principle underlying the grant of bail as envisaged in the section is that an accused person is presumed in law to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty.b)Bail being a right and not a favour and in demanding bail from accused person, the social status of the accused should be considered taking care that the amount fixed is not excessive.c)Anticipatory bail must be provided in every possible case of a person being put behind bar.d)It is a non bailable offence and Ursuala makes himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? defined & explained in the simplest way possible. Besides giving the explanation of Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.Black’s Law Dictionary describes ‘bail’ as procuring “the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.”In the 1973 case Supt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs v. Amiya Kumar Roy Choudhry, the Calcutta High Court explained the principle behind giving bail: “The law of bails… has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely, on one hand, the requirements of the society for being shielded from the hazards of being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime; and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence viz. the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty.”As opposed to ordinary bail, which is granted to a person who is under arrest, in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before arrest made.Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down the law on anticipatory bail. Sub-section (1) of the provision reads: “When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.”The provision empowers only the Sessions Court and High Court to grant anticipatory bail.Anticipatory bail became part of the new CrPC in 1973 (when the latter replaced the older Code of 1898), after the 41st Law Commission Report of 1969 recommended the inclusion of the provision.The report said, “The necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in jail for some days… Apart from false cases, where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond, or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail.”In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that S. 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).It also observed, “It may perhaps be right to describe the power (of anticipatory bail) as of an extraordinary character… But this does not justify the conclusion that the power must be exercised in exceptional cases only, because it is of an extra-ordinary character. We will really be saying once too often that all discretion has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on circumstances justifying its exercise.”While granting anticipatory bail, the Sessions Court or High Court can impose the conditions laid down in sub-section (2).Section 438(2) reads: “When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including —(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court”Q.Ursuala is charged with seriously injuring Aquaman( Half human half fish) . Injuring of a half human half fish is a very serious crime/nonbailable. Ursuala applies for anticipatory bail.Based on the information in the given passage, which of the following, if correct, would most strengthen Ursuala’s case?a)The principle underlying the grant of bail as envisaged in the section is that an accused person is presumed in law to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty.b)Bail being a right and not a favour and in demanding bail from accused person, the social status of the accused should be considered taking care that the amount fixed is not excessive.c)Anticipatory bail must be provided in every possible case of a person being put behind bar.d)It is a non bailable offence and Ursuala makes himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer?, a detailed solution for Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.Black’s Law Dictionary describes ‘bail’ as procuring “the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.”In the 1973 case Supt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs v. Amiya Kumar Roy Choudhry, the Calcutta High Court explained the principle behind giving bail: “The law of bails… has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely, on one hand, the requirements of the society for being shielded from the hazards of being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime; and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence viz. the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty.”As opposed to ordinary bail, which is granted to a person who is under arrest, in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before arrest made.Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down the law on anticipatory bail. Sub-section (1) of the provision reads: “When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.”The provision empowers only the Sessions Court and High Court to grant anticipatory bail.Anticipatory bail became part of the new CrPC in 1973 (when the latter replaced the older Code of 1898), after the 41st Law Commission Report of 1969 recommended the inclusion of the provision.The report said, “The necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in jail for some days… Apart from false cases, where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond, or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail.”In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that S. 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).It also observed, “It may perhaps be right to describe the power (of anticipatory bail) as of an extraordinary character… But this does not justify the conclusion that the power must be exercised in exceptional cases only, because it is of an extra-ordinary character. We will really be saying once too often that all discretion has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on circumstances justifying its exercise.”While granting anticipatory bail, the Sessions Court or High Court can impose the conditions laid down in sub-section (2).Section 438(2) reads: “When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including —(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court”Q.Ursuala is charged with seriously injuring Aquaman( Half human half fish) . Injuring of a half human half fish is a very serious crime/nonbailable. Ursuala applies for anticipatory bail.Based on the information in the given passage, which of the following, if correct, would most strengthen Ursuala’s case?a)The principle underlying the grant of bail as envisaged in the section is that an accused person is presumed in law to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty.b)Bail being a right and not a favour and in demanding bail from accused person, the social status of the accused should be considered taking care that the amount fixed is not excessive.c)Anticipatory bail must be provided in every possible case of a person being put behind bar.d)It is a non bailable offence and Ursuala makes himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? has been provided alongside types of Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.Black’s Law Dictionary describes ‘bail’ as procuring “the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.”In the 1973 case Supt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs v. Amiya Kumar Roy Choudhry, the Calcutta High Court explained the principle behind giving bail: “The law of bails… has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely, on one hand, the requirements of the society for being shielded from the hazards of being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime; and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence viz. the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty.”As opposed to ordinary bail, which is granted to a person who is under arrest, in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before arrest made.Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down the law on anticipatory bail. Sub-section (1) of the provision reads: “When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.”The provision empowers only the Sessions Court and High Court to grant anticipatory bail.Anticipatory bail became part of the new CrPC in 1973 (when the latter replaced the older Code of 1898), after the 41st Law Commission Report of 1969 recommended the inclusion of the provision.The report said, “The necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in jail for some days… Apart from false cases, where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond, or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail.”In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that S. 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).It also observed, “It may perhaps be right to describe the power (of anticipatory bail) as of an extraordinary character… But this does not justify the conclusion that the power must be exercised in exceptional cases only, because it is of an extra-ordinary character. We will really be saying once too often that all discretion has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on circumstances justifying its exercise.”While granting anticipatory bail, the Sessions Court or High Court can impose the conditions laid down in sub-section (2).Section 438(2) reads: “When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including —(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court”Q.Ursuala is charged with seriously injuring Aquaman( Half human half fish) . Injuring of a half human half fish is a very serious crime/nonbailable. Ursuala applies for anticipatory bail.Based on the information in the given passage, which of the following, if correct, would most strengthen Ursuala’s case?a)The principle underlying the grant of bail as envisaged in the section is that an accused person is presumed in law to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty.b)Bail being a right and not a favour and in demanding bail from accused person, the social status of the accused should be considered taking care that the amount fixed is not excessive.c)Anticipatory bail must be provided in every possible case of a person being put behind bar.d)It is a non bailable offence and Ursuala makes himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? theory, EduRev gives you an ample number of questions to practice Read the information given below carefully and answer the following question.Black’s Law Dictionary describes ‘bail’ as procuring “the release of a person from legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.”In the 1973 case Supt. and Remembrancer of Legal Affairs v. Amiya Kumar Roy Choudhry, the Calcutta High Court explained the principle behind giving bail: “The law of bails… has to dovetail two conflicting demands, namely, on one hand, the requirements of the society for being shielded from the hazards of being exposed to the misadventures of a person alleged to have committed a crime; and on the other, the fundamental canon of criminal jurisprudence viz. the presumption of innocence of an accused till he is found guilty.”As opposed to ordinary bail, which is granted to a person who is under arrest, in anticipatory bail, a person is directed to be released on bail even before arrest made.Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, lays down the law on anticipatory bail. Sub-section (1) of the provision reads: “When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail.”The provision empowers only the Sessions Court and High Court to grant anticipatory bail.Anticipatory bail became part of the new CrPC in 1973 (when the latter replaced the older Code of 1898), after the 41st Law Commission Report of 1969 recommended the inclusion of the provision.The report said, “The necessity for granting anticipatory bail arises mainly because sometimes influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purpose of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in jail for some days… Apart from false cases, where there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond, or otherwise misuse his liberty while on bail, there seems no justification to require him first to submit to custody, remain in prison for some days and then apply for bail.”In the 1980 Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia vs State of Punjab case, a five-judge Supreme Court bench led by then Chief Justice Y V Chandrachud ruled that S. 438 (1) is to be interpreted in the light of Article 21 of the Constitution (protection of life and personal liberty).It also observed, “It may perhaps be right to describe the power (of anticipatory bail) as of an extraordinary character… But this does not justify the conclusion that the power must be exercised in exceptional cases only, because it is of an extra-ordinary character. We will really be saying once too often that all discretion has to be exercised with care and circumspection depending on circumstances justifying its exercise.”While granting anticipatory bail, the Sessions Court or High Court can impose the conditions laid down in sub-section (2).Section 438(2) reads: “When the High Court or the Court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including —(i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required;(ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;(iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court”Q.Ursuala is charged with seriously injuring Aquaman( Half human half fish) . Injuring of a half human half fish is a very serious crime/nonbailable. Ursuala applies for anticipatory bail.Based on the information in the given passage, which of the following, if correct, would most strengthen Ursuala’s case?a)The principle underlying the grant of bail as envisaged in the section is that an accused person is presumed in law to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty.b)Bail being a right and not a favour and in demanding bail from accused person, the social status of the accused should be considered taking care that the amount fixed is not excessive.c)Anticipatory bail must be provided in every possible case of a person being put behind bar.d)It is a non bailable offence and Ursuala makes himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required.Correct answer is option 'D'. Can you explain this answer? tests, examples and also practice CLAT tests.