VINOD JATAV Vs. STATE NCT OF THE DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The application for bail had been filed by the present petitioner before the learned Additional Sessions Judge which was disposed of by a one line order which reads as under:- Heard. No ground for bail at this stage dismissed.

(2.) While allowing or rejecting a bail application, the courts and particularly the Sessions Court must disclose some grounds so that one can discern as to whether there has been a proper application of mind or not. This fact has been stated in so many decisions of the Supreme Court and in the recent decision in the case of Ranjitsing Brahmajeetsing Sharma v. State of Maharashtra: 2005 AIR SCW 2215, the Supreme Court held, in para 56 of the said decision, as under:- It is, furthermore, trite that for the purpose of considering an application for grant of bail, although detailed reasons are not necessary to be assigned, the order granting bail must demonstrate application of mind at least in serious cases as to why the applicant has been granted or denied the privilege of bail.

(3.) In this view of the matter, it is appropriate that this matter be remanded to the learned Additional Sessions Judge for consideration of the bail application afresh and the same may be disposed of after giving reasons. It is not necessary that the reasons should be lengthy. The only thing that is required is that there must be an indication in the order that the court has considered the case in its proper perspective. The petitioner's application shall be disposed of within a period of 10 days. With these directions, this application stands disposed of. The petitioner is at liberty to approach this court. Dasti.