SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, SANJAY KUMAR, JJ.
Srikant Upadhyay & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Bihar & Anr. - Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 1552 of 2024(@Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.7940 of 2023)
Decided on : 14-03-2024
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 438 read with Section 82/83 – Anticipatory bail – If anyone is declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 Cr.P.C., he is not entitled to relief of anticipatory bail – Power to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438, Cr.P.C. is an exceptional power and should be exercised only in exceptional cases and not as a matter of course – Its object is to ensure that a person should not be harassed or humiliated in order to satisfy grudge or personal vendetta of complainant – Sine qua non for initiation of action under Section 82, Cr. PC is prior issuance of warrant of arrest by Court concerned. (Paras 4, 5, 8 and 10)
(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 438 – Anticipatory bail – Filing of an anticipatory bail through an Advocate would not and could not be treated as appearance before a court by a person against whom such proceedings – What is required as proof for absconding is the evidence to the effect that person concerned was knowing that he was wanted and also about pendency of warrant of arrest – It is always preferable to pass orders, either way, at the earliest – When an application is filed for anticipatory bail, it cannot be adjourned without passing order of interim protection – Court may either reject application forthwith or issue an interim order for grant of anticipatory bail – In absence of any interim order, pendency of application for anticipatory bail shall not bar Trial Court in issuing/proceeding with steps for proclamation and in taking steps under Section 83, Cr.P.C., in accordance with law. (Paras 20, 22 and 23)
(C) Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999 – Section ¾ – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 341, 323, 354, 354 (B), 379, 504, 506 and 149 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 438 – Anticipatory bail application – Dismissal – Appellants were defying authority of law and moving applications for bail when they apprehended arrest owing to their nonattendance and disobedience – They failed to appear before Trial Court after receipt of summons and then after issuance of bailable warrants even when their co-accused, after issuance of bailable warrants, applied and obtained regular bail – Even after coming to know about proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C., they did not take any steps to challenge the same or to enter appearance before Trial Court to avert consequences – Order of High Court rejecting application for anticipatory bail upheld. (Paras 16, 25 and 26)
Facts of the case:
Present appeal is directed against order dated 04.04.2023 in CRLM No.67668 of 2022 passed by High Court of Judicature at Patna whereby and whereunder application for anticipatory bail filed by appellant was dismissed. Pre-arrest bail application was moved in connection with FIR registered against him and co-accused under Sections 341, 323, 354, 354 (B), 379, 504, 506 and 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999.
Findings of Court:
There is no ground for interfering with order of High Court rejecting application for anticipatory bail rather not considering application on merits. Since their action is nothing short of defying lawful orders of Court and attempting to delay proceedings, this appeal must fail. Consequently, it is dismissed.
Result : Appeal dismissed.
JUDGMENT :
C.T. RAVIKUMAR, J.
Leave granted.
1. This appeal is directed against the order dated 04.04.2023 in CRLM No.67668 of 2022 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna whereby and whereunder the application for anticipatory bail filed by the appellant was dismissed. The pre-arrest bail application was moved in connection with FIR No.79 of 2020, registered against him and co-accused at Govidganj, Police Station, District East Champaran, Bihar, under Sections 341, 323, 354, 354 (B), 379, 504, 506 and 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, ‘IPC’) and Section 3/4 of Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999 (for short, ‘the Daain Act’).
2. Heard, Mr. Basant R., learned Senior Counsel for the appellants and Mr. Anshul Narayan, learned counsel for the respondent-State.
3. The question of seminal importance that arises for consideration can better be explained and understood by referring to a decision of this Court in Prem Shankar Prasad v. State of Bihar and Anr., (2022) 14 SCC 516, which was rendered after referring to the earlier decisions of this Court in State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma, (2014) 2 SCC 171 and Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2012) 8 SCC 730. In Lavesh’s case (supra), this Court held in paragraph 12 thus: -
4. In the decision in Pradeep Sharma’s case (supra) this Court held that if anyone is declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 Cr.PC., he is not entitled to relief of anticipatory bail. After extracting Section 438, Cr.PC., it was further held therein thus:-
5. In Prem Shankar Prasad’s case (supra), this Court took note of the fact that the respondent-accused was absconding and concealing himself to avoid service of warrant of arrest and the proceedings under Sections 82/83, Cr.PC have been initiated against him, set aside the order of the High Court granting anticipatory bail ignoring the proceedings under Sections 82/83, Cr.PC. Thus, it is obvious that the position of law, which was being followed with alacrity, is that in cases where an accused against whom non-bailable warrant is pending and the process of proclamation under Sections 82/83, Cr.PC is issued, is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.
6. The learned Senior Counsel appearing for the appellants-accused would contend that the well-nigh settled position of law in respect of pre-arrest bail as above, is inapplicable in a case where a person apprehending arrest has already filed an application seeking anticipatory bail and it is pending sans any interim orders and during its pendency if the Trial Court issues proclamation under Section 82, Cr.PC. In short, the proposition of law raised is – when an application seeking anticipatory bail filed by a person apprehending arrest is pending without any interim protection, whether initiation of proceeding for issuance of proclamation under Section 82, Cr. PC would make that application worthy for further consideration on its own merits? According to the learned Senior Counsel appearin
Prem Shankar Prasad v. State of Bihar and Anr.
State of Madhya Pradesh v. Pradeep Sharma
Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi)
HDFC Bank Ltd. v. J.J.Mannan & Anr.
Savitaben Govindbhai Patel & Ors. v. State of Gujarat
Shrenik Jayantilal Jain and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra Through EOW Unit II, Mumbai
(1) Anticipatory bail – If anyone is declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 Cr.P.C., he is not entitled to relief of anticipatory bail.(2) Anticipatory bail – When an app....
If anyone is declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of Cr.P.C., he is not entitled to relief of anticipatory bail.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a person declared as a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the Cr.P.C. is not entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code.
Constitution guarantees protection of life and personal liberty of a person and this guarantee is enshrined in Article 21 of Constitution of India.
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC is an extraordinary remedy, granted only in exceptional circumstances, particularly when the applicant is not a proclaimed offender.
(1) Anticipatory bail petition – Once first anticipatory bail is denied without there being any change in fact situation, second application for same relief under Section 438 Cr.P.C. cannot be entert....
The power to grant Anticipatory Bail is available to the High Court and the Court of Sessions, even when cognizance is taken or a charge-sheet has been filed. The belief that the accused may be arres....
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.