The Railway to Reasonable Satisfaction: A Case Study on Section 197 CrPC and the Bail Necessity Supreme Court (BNSS) Test

A Critical Analysis for CLAT PG and AILET PG Aspirants

Imagine you're at a railway station and have just missed your train by a few minutes. You're left standing on the platform, wondering what to do next. This is similar to the predicament of an accused in India who is granted bail, only to find that the investigation is not progressing at a reasonable pace. The question is, what happens next? Section 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) deals with the release of a person on bail in cases where the investigation is not making progress. However, the Supreme Court introduced the Bail Necessity Supreme Court (BNSS) test in the landmark case of Khatri vs The State of Bihar (1981), which has been a game-changer in the context of bail laws in India. The BNSS test asks three questions: (1) Whether the accused has been in custody for a long time, (2) Whether the investigation is not making progress, and (3) Whether the accused is likely to influence witnesses or tamper with evidence. If the answer to all three questions is in the affirmative, then the accused may be granted bail. Let's walk through a case study to understand how this test works in practice. Suppose an accused is arrested in a murder case and is in custody for over a year. The investigation is not progressing, and the accused is a prominent businessperson who has the means to influence witnesses. In this scenario, a magistrate may grant bail to the accused, citing the BNSS test. However, what happens if the investigation suddenly picks up pace, and the accused is found to be involved in the murder? In this case, the accused's bail can be revoked, and they can be taken into custody. The BNSS test has been a topic of debate among lawyers and judges, with some arguing that it is too lenient and others arguing that it is too harsh. However, one thing is clear: the test has brought about a significant change in the way bail is granted in India. As we reflect on the BNSS test, we are reminded of the recent Navjot Singh Sidhu vs State of Punjab case (2021), where the Supreme Court granted bail to the former cricketer, citing the test. The court's decision was seen as a victory for the accused, who had been in custody for over a year. In conclusion, the BNSS test is a critical component of Indian bail laws, and understanding its nuances is essential for any law student or practicing lawyer. As we move forward in our legal careers, we must remember the importance of applying the BNSS test in a fair and just manner, taking into account the unique circumstances of each case. Only then can we ensure that justice is served and that the accused are given a fair chance to prove their innocence.