Can bail be automatically cancelled for violation of bail conditions? Madhya Pradesh High Court answers

The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently ruled that a High Court cannot order that the bail of an accused person would automatically stand cancelled for a violation of conditions in the bail order [Manish @ Virendra @ Saroj Rai vs The State of Madhya Pradesh]..Justice Vishal Dhagat observed that cancellation of bail affects the fundamental rights of a person. Therefore, any such order affecting a person’s freedom must be passed after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing, the Court held.“Reasonable opportunity of hearing is a fundamental right under the Constitution of India. If there is an automatic cancellation of bail order, then valuable right of natural justice is denied to accused. Since automatic cancellation of bail order is violative of fundamental rights of an accused person, therefore, such condition could not be made part of the bail order,” the Court said..Justice Dhagat was considering an application to modify an order passed by another single judge of the Court in March 2022.In the 2022 order, the coordinate Bench had ordered the police to arrest an accused after holding that his bail automatically stood cancelled upon his failure to mark his appearance before the police, which was a bail condition set by the High Court.The accused had been granted bail by the High Court in November 2021 with the condition to deposit ₹10 lakhs before the trial court and mark his presence before the police on the 15th of every month. It was also stated that if he failed to mark even a single appearance, then bail would stand automatically cancelled..After the accused failed to appear before the police on two dates in January and February 2022, he applied for a modification of the bail conditions set in the 2021 order. However, in March 2022, the Court dismissed the modification plea and ordered the police to arrest the accused man. He then moved another application for a recall of the dismissal order.The accused man explained to the Court that he is a resident of Banaras in Uttar Pradesh and that it takes four days for him to travel to mark his presence.The State opposed his recall application and argued that the High Court has powers to impose conditions while granting bail..The Court observed that there is a bar on reviewing or altering a court order. However, it also said that there are exceptions when the Court can relook into a judgement or order passed by it.“Court is barred from reviewing or altering its own order under Section 362 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 equivalent Section is 403 of B.N.S.S., 2023. Both sections are pari materia. While recalling a judgment Court has to apply its mind and has to look into the facts of the case, therefore, bar under Section 362 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or new Section 403 of B.N.S.S., 2023 will be operative, but there are certain exceptions when Court can recall/relook into the judgment and violation of fundamental rights is one of the said exceptions," the judgment said in this regard. .It proceeded to recall the cancellation of bail in the present case on finding that it amounted to a violation of the accused man's fundamental rights. It further asked the Registry to restore and list his application seeking a modification of bail conditions. Advocate VVR Daniel represented the accused.Government Advocate Akshay Namdeo represented the State.[Read Judgment]