The Supreme Court on Monday decided to examine whether complainants or victims in rape cases should be notified and given an opportunity to be heard before an accused is granted anticipatory bail. This review comes in the wake of a plea challenging an April 2024 decision by the Kerala High Court which revoked an anticipatory bail granted to the appellant, Suresh Babu KV, on grounds that the victim had not been heard.
The Kerala High Court had canceled the bail citing a procedural oversight because the complainant-victim was not involved in the bail hearing process. This decision was made despite the fact that there was no indication the accused had interfered with the ongoing investigation after being granted bail.
Senior Advocate R. Basant, representing the accused, argued against the High Court’s rationale, stating, “the High Court could not have canceled anticipatory bail solely on a technical ground that the victim was not heard by the trial court.” This argument prompted the Supreme Court to stay the High Court’s order and issue notices to examine the legalities involved.
A Division Bench comprising Justices BR Gavai and KV Viswanathan will look into the matter further, recognizing the significant legal implications of whether victims must be mandatorily heard during anticipatory bail proceedings in rape cases.
The appellant’s legal representatives, advocates Sriram Parakkat and Sarath Janardanan, expressed concerns that prioritizing procedural technicalities could set a troubling precedent, potentially impacting the justice process in sensitive cases like rape.
