Post July 1, 2024, New Bail Or Anticipatory Bail Applications Have To Be Preferred Under BNSS : Meghalaya HC
The Meghalaya High Court emphasised that, post July 1, 2024, any application whether bail or otherwise shall be preferred under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS).
A Single Bench of Justice W. Diengdoh observed, “Accordingly, where procedural law is concerned post 01.07.2024, any application, be it bail or otherwise, would have to be preferred under the related provisions of the BNSS, 2023 where no such applications are pending as on 01.07.2024.”
The Bench while permitting the parties to prefer their respective applications under the BNSS, allowed conversion of any application filed under the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) into that of the BNSS.
Senior Advocate K. Paul, Advocates S.M. Suna, and S. Dey represented the petitioners while AAG N.D. Chullai, GAs S. Ain, and N. Syngkon represented the respondents.
In this case, the Court was dealing with a number of similar applications, some with a prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and some for regular bail and again, some filed under the provisions of the old code and some under the new code. It, therefore, called upon the counsels appearing for the parties to address the Court on this issue so as to give a quietus to the same.
The High Court after hearing the contentions of the counsel noted, “With the BNSS replacing the Cr.P.C invariably there would arise certain complications in course of the transitional period, wherein all trials, inquiries and proceedings etc. which are pending as on 01.07.2024 would deemed to have been concluded or lapsed. The legislature has however taken care of this aspect by insertion of what is generally known as the saving clause. This is meant to ensure that such transition is smoothly processed and litigants and all involved would not be unnecessarily disturbed by such transition.”
The Court added that in spite of such saving clause, there has arisen some differences of opinion and interpretation of the relevant provisions of the BNSS vis-à-vis the CrPC, particularly in respect of the provision under Section 531 (2)(a). It said that the controversy to be clarified is the word ‘pending’ found in Section 531(2)(a) BNSS which refers to pendency of appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation as on July 1, 2024.
“The respective parties are however, directed to make necessary correction in the cause title or the body of the application as the case maybe”, it ordered.
Accordingly, the High Court allowed the parties to prefer their respective applications under BNSS.
Cause Title- Banmaki Suna @ Lik Suna v. State of Meghalaya
Appearance:
Petitioner: Senior Advocate K. Paul, Advocates S.M. Suna, B.F. Kharwanlang, R. Majaw, S. Dey, S. Nongsiej, M.M. Zaman, N.J. Dutta, S.S. Yadav, L. Syiem, W. Bynnud, and B.K. Biswa.
Respondents: AAG N.D. Chullai, GAs E.R. Chyne, N. Syngkon, J.N. Rynjah, S.A. Sheikh, S. Ain, R. Gurung, J. Thabah, S. Shyam, PP K. Khan, and Addl. PP S. Sengupta.
