Bail cancellation for flight risk where a foreign national had no local roots and faced serious liberty infirmity.

In bail matters, the relevant considerations are the gravity of the offence, the nature of the evidence, the risk of absconding, and the likelihood of interference with a fair trial. In proceedings to cancel or set aside bail, interference is justified where the liberty order is vitiated by a serious infirmity. On the stated facts, the accused was a foreign national with no established roots or reliable contacts in India and was found carrying concealed foreign-origin gold without valid authority, so the risk of flight was treated as real and the grant of bail as inadequately reasoned. The bail order was therefore set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order granting bail to a foreign national accused of smuggling gold bars suffered from such serious infirmity that it could be set aside in proceedings under Sections 439(2) and 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The governing considerations in bail matters are the gravity of the offence, the nature of the evidence, the possibility of the accused absconding, and the likelihood of interference with a fair trial. In an application to cancel or set aside bail, the decisive question is whether the order granting liberty is vitiated by a serious infirmity warranting interference in the interests of justice. On the facts, the respondent was a foreign national, had no established roots or reliable contacts in India, and was found carrying concealed foreign-origin gold on his person without valid authority. The material before the Court did not disclose any sufficient factual basis for the conclusion that he would remain available for trial. The risk of flight was therefore real, and the discretion exercised in favour of bail was not supported by adequate reasons.

Conclusion: The order granting bail was held to suffer from serious infirmity and was set aside.

---