SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
UDAY UMESH LALIT, S. RAVINDRA BHAT, JJ.
Abhishek Kumar - Appellant
Versus
State of Delhi - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 360 of 2022 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.11390 of 2019)
Decided On : 07-03-2022
Anticipatory Bail - Criminal Procedure - The court granted anticipatory bail to the appellant in connection with the offences punishable under Sections 376/328/506/313 IPC, directing the appellant to furnish cash security and extend cooperation in the investigation.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant sought anticipatory bail in connection with a crime registered for offences under Sections 376/328/506/313 IPC. The High Court rejected the application, leading to the present appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the appellant is entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail, considering the entirety of the situation.
Issues: The issue was whether the appellant should be granted anticipatory bail in connection with the registered offences.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the circumstances and granted anticipatory bail to the appellant, directing specific conditions for release and cooperation in the investigation.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the order of the High Court was set aside, and the appellant was granted anticipatory bail with specific conditions.
ORDER :
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 11.10.2019 passed by the High Court of Delhi at New Delhi in Bail Application No.1913 of 2019.
3. Apprehending arrest in connection with crime registered pursuant to First Information Report No.300/2019 dated 21.05.2019 lodged With Police Station New Ashok Nagar, District East Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 376/328/506/313 IPC, the appellant preferred an application for anticipatory bail in terms of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The application having been rejected by the High Court, the present appeal has been preferred.
4. While issuing notice vide order dated 18.12.2019, this Court granted interim relief and directed that no coercive action be taken against the appellant. The appellant has enjoyed said relief for the last more than two years.
5. We have heard learned counsel for the parties.
6. Considering the entirety of the situation, in our view, the appellant is entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.
7. We, therefore, allow this appeal, set-aside the order passed by the High Court, and direct as under :
(b) The appellant shall extend complete co-operation in the ensuing investigation and in order to facilitate the investigation, the appellant shall present himself before the Investigating Officer as and when his presence is requisitioned by the Investigating Officer.
8. With these observations, the appeal is allowed.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.