Bail

The mechanism for cancellation of bail is provided in law in order to ensure that justice will be done to the society by preventing the accused who had been set at liberty by the bail order from tampering with the evidence in a heinous crime. At the same time, cancellation of bail takes away the liberty granted by the Constitution and affirmed by an order of the Court, which granted bail. Taking note of the fact that cancellation of bail necessarily involves the review of a decision already made, it has been emphasized that the same should always be exercised very sparingly by the court of law.

This paper deals with "warrant" which is one of the six modes of production of an accused before a Court of law in Pakistani Jurisdiction. The general procedural law is enacted in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 which is exhaustive on the subject. An attempt has been made to explain the subject in the light of the judicial precedents. What, when, where, why,who, whom, how are the modes to know this subject like all other subjects.

This paper deals with the concept of bail in criminal law and the judgment of 3 judge's Bench of Supreme Court of India in CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 462 OF 2018, decided on 27th March, 2018 wherein it is held that Anticipatory Bail does not automatically entitle accused to regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.

the term Anticipatory Bail is not found in the Code of Criminal Procedure Code but it is a terminology used in general practice. The Code describes it under Section 438 as Bail in the event of arrest. Arrest is not precluded but it prevents detention in the custody.

The rule is that there should be an apprehension of arrest and the Court should be satisfied that there is a reasonable apprehension. Gurubaksh Singh Sibba vs State of Punjab is the landmark judgment and had has since then been followed till Siddharam Mhetre was taken as an opportunity to revisit the concept of bail in anticipation of arrest.

In January 2017, six people were killed and at least 30 injured when Dimitrious Gargasoulas drove his car into pedestrians on Melbourne's Bourke Street mall in an apparently deliberate attack. In the aftermath, community shock turned to outrage when it emerged that Gargasoulas had been released by a Victorian bail justice only days before. Within days, the Victorian Government announced changes to the State's bail system, as well as a major review of Victoria's bail laws, to be undertaken by former Director of Public Prosecutions, Justice Paul Coghlan, currently a judge in the Victorian Court of Appeal. Following the Coghlan review, Victoria's bail laws are arguably the most onerous in Australia. This article presents a discussion of recent reforms to bail laws around Australia. It argues that amendments to bail legislation across the country reflect shifting views on the purposes of bail and the principles underlying the bail system.

Bail reform is hot. Over the past two years, jurisdictions around the country have moved to limit or end money-bail practices that discriminate against the poor. While cheered by many, bail reform is vehemently opposed by the powerful bail-bond industry. In courts around the country, lawyers representing this industry have argued that reform is unnecessary and even unconstitutional. One particularly insidious argument advanced by bail-bond apologists is that a “wall of authority” supports the proposition that “bail is not excessive merely because the defendant is unable to pay it.” In other words, authority rejects the right to affordable bail. This Article critically examines this “wall of authority” and evaluates the true doctrinal standing of the right to affordable bail. After developing a novel rhetorical account of legitimacy in constitutional argument, the Article demonstrates that authority supporting the bail-bond position is illegitimate in two senses – it is formally inva...