Mere registration of multiple cases not a ground for cancellation of Bail: Karnataka High Court

Mere registration of multiple cases against a person cannot be a ground for cancellation of bail, the Karnataka High Court held on Monday reiterating the settled position of law in this regard (Ms X vs State of Karnataka). .A single-judge bench of Justice HP Sandesh ruled that in the absence of any cogent material on record, the liberty of any person as envisaged under Article 21 of the Constitution of India cannot be curtailed on the mere ground of number of cases being pending against him.."It is settled law that Section 439(2) of Cr.P.C. has to be invoked in exceptional cases when it causes miscarriage of justice, if it is not invoked and the same has to be exercised sparingly and not mere asking of the cancellation of bail,"the High Court said..The court, therefore, concluded that the petition to exercise powers conferred under Section 439(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure and cancel the bail granted to accused, was without merits. .The ruling came in a petition filed by a rape survivor seeking cancellation of bail granted to the accused on the ground that he was a habitual offender and had similar cases registered against him..The petitioner (complainant) and the accused had come in contact through a matrimonial website application. The accused expressed his desire to get married to the complainant and subsequently, started demanding the complainant to engage in an intimate relationship with him. .Shortly thereafter, he started demanding for payments of money from her amounting to Rs 31 lakh. The complainant later came to know that the accused was already married for almost ten years and also had a child from the said marriage. .Since he cheated the complainant on the pretext of false promise to marry her, a complaint was lodged under Sections 376 (Punishment for sexual assault), 420 (Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property), and 506 (Punishment for criminal intimidation) of the Indian Penal Code. .The accused approached the Karnataka High Court for bail and was granted the same on September 3, 2020. The complainant then moved the Karnataka High Court seeking cancellation of the bail granted to the accused. .The petitioner represented by Advocate Asim Malik contended that the accused was a habitual offender and had 11 cases pedning against him. In three out of the pending cases, he was accused of rape charges, it was pointed out.It was alleged that the "modus operandi" of the accused was to deceive women by inducing them to enter into a physical relationship by promising marriage and then threaten them to pay up..The Karnataka government supported the petition stating that several cases are pending against the accused and the same were suppressed when the accused had approached the High Court for bail..Opposing the cancellation of bail, counsel for the accused, Reny Sebastian argued that pendency of cases against a person cannot be the only ground to come to the conclusion that he is a habitual offender. It was further contended that a person can be considered a habitual offender only if he/ she has been convicted in more than three cases. .After going through the rival arguments, the court observed that mere registration of several cases against the accused is not a ground to invoke Section 439 (2) of CrPC. While exercising the power under Section 439 (2) of CrPC, the Court is bound to look into the material available on record, the single=judge added. .On the point of pending cases against the accused, the Bench promptly observed that in all the cases, he was enlarged on bail and not convicted.."Merely because the prosecution has failed to bring out the said cases which are pending against him while considering the bail petition, the same cannot be a ground for canceling the same", the court said..On these grounds, the court dismissed the criminal petition moved by the petitioner seeking cancellation of bail of the accused. .[Read order here]