The Disparity In Bail Matters, A Critical Analysis Of Approach Adopted By Courts In Dealing With Bail Matters

Abstract

Bail constitutes a vital safeguard within the criminal justice system, embodying both the presumption of innocence and the protection of personal liberty. In India, however, the bail framework displays pronounced inconsistencies, heavy dependence on subjective judicial discretion, and structural inequalities that disproportionately burden economically and socially vulnerable groups. This study critically evaluates the statutory foundation, judicial trends, and persistent challenges in India’s bail regime, demonstrating how the existing legal architecture frequently struggles to balance individual freedoms with legitimate concerns of public interest.¹

The paper analyzes key constitutional and judicial interventions—particularly those of the Supreme Court—that aim to curb arbitrary arrests and promote a liberty-centric approach to bail.² It also examines recent legislative proposals, such as the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) and suggestions for a dedicated Bail Act, to assess their potential contribution toward modernizing and rationalizing bail jurisprudence.³ By identifying systemic shortcomings—including prolonged pre-trial detention, inadequate access to legal aid, procedural delays, and the restrictive bail conditions embedded in certain special statutes—the research highlights the urgent need for comprehensive reform.⁴

The study proposes a multidimensional strategy for strengthening bail processes: legislative codification, wider adoption of non-custodial alternatives, more robust legal aid mechanisms, enhanced judicial accountability, and greater public awareness. It concludes that substantive reform of bail laws is indispensable for upholding constitutional guarantees, minimizing unnecessary incarceration, and creating a more just and efficient criminal justice system in India.⁵