Not Mentioning Grant Of Bail In Detention Order Is Serious Lapse, Gives Rise To Inference Of Non-Application Of…
Not Mentioning Grant of Bail in Detention Order Is a Serious Lapse, Gives Rise to Inference of Non-Application of Mind
🔹 Meaning of the Principle
When a court or authority issues a detention order or any order related to the custody of an accused, it is mandatory to mention whether bail was granted or refused.
Failure to mention the status of bail in the detention or custody order is considered a serious procedural lapse.
Such omission raises an inference that the authority did not apply its mind properly while issuing the detention order.
This affects the validity and legality of the detention order, potentially rendering it liable to be set aside.
🔹 Judicial Reasoning
Duty of the Authority to Apply Mind
Every official or judicial order must reflect deliberate and conscious application of mind.
The omission to mention grant or refusal of bail suggests the order was passed mechanically or without proper consideration.
Importance of Bail Status
Bail directly affects the legal status and liberty of the accused.
Ignoring or omitting bail information in a detention order leads to confusion and possible miscarriage of justice.
Procedural Fairness and Transparency
The court/authority must provide clear and complete reasons in the order.
Non-mention of bail status undermines the transparency and accountability of the judicial process.
Inferences Drawn
The omission can be interpreted as non-application of mind, which is a ground for setting aside the order.
It indicates lack of due diligence and can invalidate the detention.
🔹 Illustrative Example
An accused is arrested and a detention order is issued.
The detention order states the accused is detained but does not mention whether bail was granted or rejected.
On challenge, the court observes that such failure is a serious lapse.
The court holds the detention order invalid due to non-application of mind.
🔹 Key Points
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Mention of bail in detention order | Mandatory to state grant/refusal of bail |
| Serious procedural lapse | Omission implies carelessness or mechanical order |
| Inference of non-application of mind | Can lead to order being quashed or set aside |
| Impact on accused’s liberty | May result in wrongful detention or denial of liberty |
🔹 Case Law Reasoning (General)
Courts have consistently held that a detention order or similar orders must be complete and self-explanatory.
Failure to mention bail status or related liberty rights has been treated as non-application of mind.
Such procedural defects have led courts to interfere and quash detention orders to protect fundamental rights.
🔹 Conclusion
The principle highlights the importance of judicial and procedural diligence. Not mentioning grant or refusal of bail in detention orders is a significant oversight that undermines the validity of the order and signals non-application of mind, which courts do not tolerate.
RELATED Blog
0 comments