PINKI
Vs.
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANOTHER
( Before : J.B. Pardiwala and R. Mahadevan, JJ. )
Criminal Appeal No. 1927 of 2025 (Arising Out of SLP (Criminal) No. 4658 of 2025) with Criminal Appeal No. 1928 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 592 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1929 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 590 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1930 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4660 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1931 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4661 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1932 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4662 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1933 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4664 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1934 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4665 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1935 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4666 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1936 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4667 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1937 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4668 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1938 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4670 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1939 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4671 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1940 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4672 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1941 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4673 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1942 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4674 of 2025), Criminal Appeal No. 1943 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4675 of 2025) and Criminal Appeal No. 1944 of 2025 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) 4676 of 2025)
Decided on : 15-04-2025
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 — S. 439 — Bail — Cancellation of Bail — Factors for Consideration — Child Trafficking — Appeals preferred by victims (kith and kin of trafficked children) assailing High Court orders granting bail to accused involved in a large-scale, organized, interstate child trafficking racket — The offences alleged involve kidnapping, buying, and selling of minor children primarily from impoverished backgrounds, punishable under Ss. 363, 311 & 370(5) IPC — High Court granted bail citing factors such as accused not being named in FIR, disclosure of name by co-accused, non-recovery of victim from the specific accused, grant of bail to similarly situated co-accused, and the principle of ‘bail is rule, jail is exception’ — Such exercise of discretion by the High Court, in cases involving grave offences like organized child trafficking with interstate ramifications, requires deeper scrutiny concerning the serious nature of the crime, modus operandi, societal impact, and potential threat posed by accused if released — The High Court’s approach found to be callous, overlooking critical aspects including the organized nature of the crime and the subsequent absconding of several accused post-bail, thereby jeopardizing the trial.
