1. Arrest and prosecution for forgery, fabricating evidence, and conspiracy under the Indian Penal Code — Application for interim bail pending regular bail consideration. (Para 3 , 4 , 5 )
Back
Next 
2022 Supreme(SC) 1822
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Uday Umesh Lalit, CJI., S. Ravindra Bhat, Sudhanshu Dhulia, JJ.
Teesta Atul Setalvad – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
Criminal Appeal Nos. 1417-1418 of 2022 (Arising Out of SLP (Crl.) Nos. 7413-7414 of 2022)
Decided On : 02-09-2022
Important Points
The court granted the relief of interim bail based on the completion of custodial interrogation and the peculiar facts of the case, including the appellant being a lady.
Subject
Criminal Law - Bail Proceedings
Act Referred
Headnote
BAIL - Criminal Proceedings - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 468, 471, 194, 211, 218 read with Section 120-B - The judgment discussed the appellant's custody and the relief of interim bail during the pendency of the matter. The court highlighted the completion of custodial interrogation and the peculiar facts of the case, including the appellant being a lady, in granting the relief of interim bail.
Legal Category Hierarchy
Advocates Appeared:
Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Mihir Desai, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Aparna Bhat, Advocate, Ms. Karishma Maria, Advocate, Mr. Nizam Pasha, Advocate, Mr. Adit Subramaniam Pujari, Advocate, Ms. Rupali Samuel, Advocate, Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Advocate, Ms. Aparajita Jamwal, Advocate, Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG, Mr. S.V. Raju, ASG, Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Advocate, Mr. Rajat Nair, Advocate, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Advocate, Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Advocate, Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, Advocate, Counsel for the appearing Parties.
Mr. Kapil Sibal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Mihir Desai, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Huzefa Ahmadi, Sr. Advocate, Ms. Aparna Bhat, Advocate, Ms. Karishma Maria, Advocate, Mr. Nizam Pasha, Advocate, Mr. Adit Subramaniam Pujari, Advocate, Ms. Rupali Samuel, Advocate, Mr. Rishabh Parikh, Advocate, Ms. Aparajita Jamwal, Advocate, Mr. Tushar Mehta, SG, Mr. S.V. Raju, ASG, Mr. Kanu Agrawal, Advocate, Mr. Rajat Nair, Advocate, Ms. Swati Ghildiyal, Advocate, Mr. Madhav Sinhal, Advocate, Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, Advocate, Counsel for the appearing Parties.
Table of Contents
2. Appellant claims lack of specific allegations and entitlement to interim bail — State contends matter is pending before High Court and sufficient evidence exists. (Para 13 , 16 , 17 )
3. Custodial interrogation completed — Offences relate to old events — Gender of the accused is a relevant factor for granting interim bail. (Para 18 , 21 , 22 , 23 )
4. Interim bail may be granted when custodial interrogation is complete and specific personal circumstances, such as the gender of the accused, warrant relief. (Para 22 , 23 )
5. Appeals allowed to the extent of granting interim bail subject to conditions, including passport surrender and cooperation with the investigation. (Para 24 , 25 )
6. When is interim bail appropriate during the pendency of a regular bail application?
Interim bail may be granted when the essential ingredients of the investigation, including custodial interrogation, have been completed, and the court finds the circumstances justify release until the substantive application is considered. (Para 21 , 22 )
7. Does the gender of the accused play a role in the grant of interim bail?
Yes, the court may consider the fact that the accused is a lady as a peculiar fact justifying the grant of interim bail, though such relief may not necessarily reflect the merits of the case. (Para 23 )
8. Does the grant of interim bail to one accused entitle co-accused to similar relief?
No, relief granted based on peculiar facts, such as gender, does not automatically extend to other accused persons; their applications must be considered purely on their own merits. (Para 23 )
ORDER
1. Leave granted.
2. These appeals challenge (a) the order dated 30.07.2022 passed by the Sessions Court [City Civil & Sessions Court, Ahmedabad], in Cr. Miscellaneous Application No.4617 of 2022; and, (b) the order dated 03.08.2022 passed by the High Court [High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad] in Crl. Miscellaneous Application No.14435 of 2022.
3. The appellant - a lady was arrested on 25.06.2022 and has since then been in custody in connection with crime registered pursuant to First Information Report being I-C.R. No.11191011220087 dated 25.06.2022, lodged with DCB Police Station, Ahmedabad in respect of offences punishable under Sections 468, 471, 194, 211, 218 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
4. The First Information Report made reference to various proceedings including the judgment and order dated 24.06.2022 passed by this Court in Zakia Ahsan Jafri v. State of Gujarat & Anr., reported in 2022 (9) SCALE Page 1.
5. After referring to various developments, the First Information Report stated as under:
'There is material in the final report submitted by the SIT which indicates that Teesta Setalvad had conjured concocted forged fabricated facts and documents and or evidence including fabrication of documents by persons who were prospective witnesses of the complainant. It is not only a case of fabrication of documents, but also of influencing and tutoring the witnesses and making them depose on pre typed affidavit, as has been noted in the judgment of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court dated 11.07.2011 in Criminal Misc. Application No.1692 of 2011.'
6. It is a matter of record that after her arrest, the appellant was remanded to the police custody for seven days and was interrogated every day by the concerned investigating machinery. Thereafter, the appellant was remanded to and continues to be in judicial custody.
7. An application for bail being Criminal Miscellaneous
8. Application (Regular) No.4617 of 2022 was moved on behalf of the appellant seeking relief of bail. Similar application for bail was moved on behalf of co-accused Raman Pillai Bhaskaren Nair Sreekumar.
9. Both the applications were taken up for consideration together by the Sessions Court, which by its order dated 30.07.2022 rejected the submissions advanced on behalf of the concerned accused and dismissed both the applications.
10. The appellant then approached the High Court by filing Criminal Miscellaneous Application No.14435 of 2022 praying inter alia that the appellant be released on regular bail in connection with the aforesaid First Information Report and pending consideration of said Miscellaneous Application by the High Court, she be enlarged on interim bail in the aforestated crime.
11. By its order dated 03.08.2022, the High Court issued rule and made it returnable on 19.09.2022. The order recorded that the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor waived service of rule on behalf of the respondent State.
12. The present appeals seek to challenge both the orders, one passed by the Sessions Court and the Order passed by the High Court to the extent it did not grant interim relief, as prayed for.
13. While issuing notice vide its order dated 22.08.2022, this Court recorded the submissions of the learned counsel appearing for the appellant as under:
'It is submitted that the allegations in the F.I.R. are nothing but recitation of the proceedings which had culminated in the judgment of this Court and beyond such recitation nothing specific has been alleged against the petitioner.'
14. After issuance of notice, affidavit in response has been filed on behalf of the State to which rejoinder affidavit has also been filed on behalf of the appellant.
15. In these appeals, we have heard Mr. Kapil Sibal, learned Senior Advocate for the appellant; Mr. Tushar Mehta, learned Solicitor General and Mr. S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General on behalf of the State.
16. According to Mr. Kapil Sibal:
a. The facts narrated in the First Information Report ar
