Firos Ali v. State of Kerala
Successive bail by the same accused should go to the same judge. Co-accused bail can go as per roster. Registry and lawyers must stop forum shopping.
firos-ali-v-state-of-kerala
The Full Bench of the Kerala High Court set clear listing rules for bail. If the same accused files bail again in the same case, it should go to the same judge (if available). This keeps decisions consistent and stops forum shopping.
A co-accused can move bail before the roster judge because their facts may differ. The registry, defence, and prosecution must disclose earlier bail orders and ensure proper assignment. Repeat bail without new circumstances is not maintainable.
- Should successive bail by the same accused return to the same judge?
- Must a co-accused go before the judge who decided another accused’s bail?
- Do registry protocols require checks to prevent forum shopping?
- Same accused, same case → same judge (if available) for successive bail, to preserve discipline and consistency.
- Co-accused bail can be listed as per roster; their pleas may rest on different facts.
- Registry must screen and route cases correctly; both sides must disclose all prior bail attempts and orders.
- Successive bail without a change in circumstances is generally not maintainable.
- During vacation, list before the vacation judge with prior orders flagged; the judge may decide or defer.
Crime No. 1820/2014 FIR at Palakkad Town South PS; petitioner later seeks bail in High Court.
First Bail Heard and dismissed by a single judge.
Second Bail Fresh bail moved before a different judge; forum-shopping concern raised.
Full Bench Constituted to clarify listing and disclosure duties in successive/co-accused bail.
Guidelines Court lays down rules to ensure consistency and stop manipulation.
Petitioner
- Fresh bail should be considered on current grounds, not bound to prior judge.
- Co-accused may have different roles; strict “same judge” rule is impractical.
State/Registry Concerns
- Successive bail before different judges risks forum shopping.
- Need uniform listing and mandatory disclosure of earlier orders.
- Same accused, same case: list successive bail before the same judge (if available).
- Co-accused: need not go to the same judge; list as per roster.
- Registry to verify prior attempts and route applications correctly.
- Parties must disclose earlier bail pleas and attach prior orders.
- Repeat bail without new circumstances is not maintainable.
- During vacation, list before vacation judge with prior orders flagged.
Consistency over convenience. Listing successive bail before the same judge maintains uniformity and blocks forum shopping. Co-accused bail is independent and follows the roster.
- Promotes judicial discipline and predictability.
- Shields the system from judge hunting.
- Sets clear duties for registry and counsel.
- Same judge for successive bail (if available).
- Co-accused → roster judge.
- Disclosure of prior bail is mandatory.
- Registry must screen and route.
- Vacation judge handles during breaks.
- No repeat bail without new facts.
- SAME judge for successive bail of the same accused.
- ROSTER judge for co-accused.
- REVEAL all prior bail and attach orders.
Issue
How should courts list successive bail by the same accused and bail by co-accused to avoid forum shopping?
Rule
Same accused → same judge (if available); co-accused → roster; mandatory disclosure; registry screening; no repeat bail without new facts.
Application
Second application before a different judge risked inconsistency; guidelines ensure uniform listing and transparency.
Conclusion
Guidelines issued and applied; case disposed with authoritative directions to registry and parties.
- Forum Shopping
- Trying to get a favourable order by choosing a judge or bench.
- Successive Bail
- A fresh bail plea by the same accused in the same case after an earlier decision.
- Roster
- Administrative allocation of cases among judges.
State of Maharashtra v. Captain Buddhikota Subha Rao
Successive bailExplains the need for new circumstances for repeat bail applications.
Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan
Change of circumstancesLays down when a second bail can be entertained by courts.
Shahzad Hasan Khan v. Ishtiaq Hasan Khan
Judicial proprietyEmphasises consistent approach and avoidance of conflicting orders.
- CASE_TITLE
- Firos Ali v. State of Kerala
- PRIMARY_KEYWORDS
- successive bail, same judge, forum shopping
- SECONDARY_KEYWORDS
- registry duty, co-accused bail, vacation judge, disclosure duty
- PUBLISH_DATE
- 2025-11-02
- AUTHOR_NAME
- Gulzar Hashmi
- LOCATION
- India
- SLUG
- firos-ali-v-state-of-kerala
- CITATION
- 2016 SCC OnLine Ker 18756
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now