FIROS ALI Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Apex Court, in the case of Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiaq Hasan Khan [AIR 1987 SC 1613(1)], while taking notice of the fact that successive bail applications are being filed by the same accused in the same crime, held that the long standing convention and judicial discipline requiring the bail application/applications subsequently filed shall be placed before the learned Judge who passed orders on the bail application filed earlier need to be followed. It was observed further in the same matter thus:

(2.) From the aforementioned observations of the Apex Court, it is amply clear that in order to prevent abuse of the process of court and to prohibit the litigant from forum shopping in selecting the court depending on whether the court is to his liking or not and in order to discourage the filing of successive bail applications without any new factor having cropped up, the successive bail applications in the same crime by the same accused shall be placed before the same Judge who has disposed of the earlier bail application, if such learned Judge is available for orders. If such a procedure is adopted, conflicting orders could also be avoided.

(3.) The ratio laid down in the aforementioned judgment is reiterated by the Apex Court in the judgment in State of Maharashtra v. Captain Buddhikota Subha Rao [1989(2) R.C.R.(Criminal) 612 : AIR 1989 SC 2292] equivalent to [(1989) Supp. (2) SCC 605] wherein, it is observed thus: