Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
VIKRAM NATH, SANDEEP MEHTA, JJ.
Jagdeo Prasad – Appellant
Versus
The State of Bihar & Ors. – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No(s). of 2025 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 17805 of 2024)
With Criminal Appeal No(s). of 2025 (Arising out of SLP(Crl.) No. 17569 of 2024)
Decided On : 17-09-2025
Criminal Law - Anticipatory Bail
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Section 302 read with Section 34 – Arms Act, 1959 – Section 27 – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 438 [Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 – Section 482] – Grant of anticipatory bail – Murder case – High Court has not given any cogent reason for granting anticipatory bail to accused-respondents – Accused-respondents have been named in FIR registered at behest of appellant – High Court has not fairly appreciated gravity of accusations levelled against accused respondents – There is a categorical assertion by appellant-complainant against accused that latter were running a racket of granting loans at higher interest rates and later extorting loaned money – While protection of individual liberty is important, Courts must not turn a blind eye to suffering of victims – Balance has to be struck to protect individual liberty of accused as well as to secure an environment that is free from any fear in hearts of victim of alleged perpetrators – Although grant of bail is a discretionary exercise, Courts must be cautious to exercise this discretion judiciously – In present case, this discretion was totally uncalled for especially at stage of anticipatory bail – Murder of appellant-complainant’s wife was committed in broad daylight – There is a history of tensed relations between parties that materially establish a prima facie case against accused-respondents and all more reasons to protect victims – Grant of anticipatory bail to accused respondents is unwarranted and without any valid reason which has resulted in miscarriage of justice – High Court fails to record any reason for directly granting anticipatory bail without impleading appellant-complainant as a party – Having regard to gravity of offences alleged, High Court was not justified in passing impugned order granting anticipatory bail to accused respondents – Order passed by High Court set aside. (Paras 5.1, 5.2, 5.3, 5.4,6, 7, 8 and 9)
Facts of the case:
Present appeal on behalf of appellant complainant assails order dated 12th March, 2024, passed by High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14816 of 2024. High Court has granted anticipatory bail to respondents in FIR registered under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 27 of Arms Act, 1959.
Findings of Court:
Respondent no. 2 is directed to surrender within 4 weeks and apply for regular bail. Bail application so preferred shall be considered on its own merits.
Result : Appeal allowed.
Key Points: - The Court states that grant of anticipatory bail is discretionary and must be exercised cautiously to balance individual liberty with protecting victims’ fear and safety. (!) (!) - The High Court’s order granting anticipatory bail in the Patna case was set aside for lack of cogent reasons, considering the gravity of the offences and the threat to victims. (!) (!) (!) (!) (!) - The Supreme Court directs that accused-respondents surrender within four weeks and apply for regular bail, with bail applications to be considered on their merits. (!) (!) - In the second SLP, the Court holds that the High Court gravely erred in granting anticipatory bail to respondent no. 2, and sets aside the High Court order; directs surrender and regular bail process. (!) (!) - The judgment emphasizes avoiding direct interference by the High Court in anticipatory bail when concurrent remedies are available and notes issues of parity should not dictate granting anticipatory bail where prima facie case exists. (!) (!)
The court held anticipatory bail was unwarranted and without valid reason, as the murder was committed in broad daylight with hired assassins, and there was a history of threats and extortion establishing a prima facie case against the accused-respondents. (Para 5 , 7 )
The court held there is no parity between regular bail and anticipatory bail, as their objects and legal frameworks differ; regular bail secures presence during trial while anticipatory bail protects liberty from pre-trial detention. (Para 11 )
The court observed that the High Court should encourage exhausting the alternative concurrent remedy before directly interfering, to balance stakeholder interests and allow the Sessions Court to assess the judicial perspective applied. (Para 6 )
ORDER
Criminal Appeal @ SLP (Crl.) No.(s) 17805 of 2024:
1. Leave granted.
2. The present appeal on behalf of the appellant-complainant assails order dated 12th March, 2024, passed by the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Miscellaneous No. 14816 of 2024. The High Court has granted anticipatory bail to respondent nos. 2 and 3 (“accused-respondents”) in FIR, bearing no. 773 of 2023 dated 16th December, 2023, registered under Section 302 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”) and Section 27 of Arms Act, 1959.
3. Brief facts, in a nutshell, relevant for the disposal of the present appeal are stated hereinunder:
3.1. On 16th December, 2023 the appellant-complainant submitted a written complaint before Police Station, Gopalpur alleging, inter alia, that his wife Kumari Pushpa (“deceased”) was shot dead on the same day at about 03:30 P.M. The deceased was employed as a health worker at Primary Health Center, Pandarak.
3.2. According to the appellant, his wife was killed at the behest of named accused persons, including accused-respondents, who had been continuously threatening and harassing the deceased to extort money. On account of the continuous threats as meted, the deceased had already paid lakhs of rupees to them. Finally, when the deceased was unable to meet the extortion demands, the accused got her eliminated by employing contract killers.
3.3. The police thus, registered the present FIR dated 16th December, 2023, against five accused persons, including accused-respondents. The investigation was commenced immediately.
3.4. Upon investigation, the police examined a CCTV footage from the camera installed in a shop near the place of occurrence. In the video, the deceased was seen walking with a middle-aged man from Bhelwara turn at around 03:22 P.M. when two persons riding on a bike with helmets came there, shot the deceased and fled away.
3.5. The police claimed to have achieved a breakthrough with the arrest of one Vishal Kumar, who gave a confessional statement stating that family members of the accused-respondents had hired one Bittu Kumar for a sum of Rs. 2,40,000/- for the murder of the deceased.
3.6. During the investigation, it was also revealed that it is the modus operandi of the accused to lend money at exorbitant interest rates of about 35% per month to individuals. To recover this amount, the accused would then coerce the borrowers into taking loans from other moneylenders and forcibly take possession of the subsequently borrowed money.
3.7. Apprehending their arrest, the accused-respondents preferred anticipatory bail application before the High Court. The High Court vide order dated 12th March, 2024, has allowed the anticipatory bail application. Aggrieved, the appellant-complainant is before us.
4. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the material available on record.
5. At the outset, we are unable to side with the reasoning ascribed by the High Court to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-respondents for the reasons discussed hereinafter.
5.1. In the impugned order, the High Court has not given any cogent reason for granting anticipatory bail to accused-respondents. It appears that the High Court was influenced by the threefold contention of learned counsel for accused-respondents. First, the accused-respondents are women with clean antecedents. Second, it was highly improbable that the deceased who was working as health worker would give lakhs of rupees in extortion. In fact, the deceased had borrowed some amount from accused no. 1 (Murari Prasad) for purchasing land and were not returning it back. Third, it was for this reason that the complainant saw an opportunity to falsely implicate the entire family of the accused-respondents.
5.2. In the present case, the accused-respondents have been named in the FIR registered at the behest of the appellant. The High Court has not fairly appreciated the gravity of the accusations levelled against the accused-respon
Grant of anticipatory bail – Although grant of bail is a discretionary exercise, Courts must be cautious to exercise this discretion judiciously – Balance has to be struck to protect individual liber....
Anticipatory bail can be granted despite a co-accused receiving regular bail; courts must safeguard liberty while ensuring due process.
Accused praying for anticipatory bail has to make out more than a prima facie case of false implication – Grant of anticipatory bail is not a matter of course.
Anticipatory bail – Court concerned has to be very cautious as grant of interim protection or protection to accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper investigation to....
(1) Bail application – Speedy disposal – Bail and anticipatory applications must be decided expeditiously on their own merits, without relegating parties to a state of indefinite pendency – High Cour....
Anticipatory bail – Specious reason of change in circumstances cannot be invoked for successive anticipatory bail applications, once it is rejected by a speaking order and that too by same Judge.
(1) Cancellation of bail is to be dealt on a different footing in comparison to a proceeding for grant of bail – It is necessary that ‘cogent and overwhelming reasons’ are present for cancellation of....
The power to grant bail should be exercised judiciously, taking into consideration the gravity of the offence, the evidence on record, and the likelihood of the accused tampering with evidence or inf....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
