In Brief
A 19-year-old woman appealed against the High Court's grant of regular bail to her uncle, who was accused of raping her twice and repeatedly molesting her over years. The High Court's bail order was cryptic and contained no specific reasoning. The Supreme Court held that bail orders in serious offences like rape must be reasoned and must address relevant factors including the nature of the crime, the accused's criminal history (he had nearly twenty cases against him), and the risk of tampering with witnesses. The Court set aside the High Court's order as suffering from non-application of mind, emphasizing that reasoning is fundamental to judicial orders, especially regarding matters affecting personal liberty in serious criminal cases.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.