IMPORTANT POINT
Anticipatory bail may be granted even if proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.P.C. are active, depending on case specifics, despite the usual ineligibility of proclaimed offenders.

JUDGMENT :

Jitendra Kumar, J.

The present petition has been filed on behalf of the petitioners, apprehending their arrest, in connection with Manjhi PS. Case No.-379 of 2024 dated 27.11.2024, registered for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 109, 103(1), 352 and 3(5) of BNS, 2023.

2. As per allegation, the petitioners and co-accused/Kedar Mahto caused injury by iron rod, knife and spade to the mother of the informant in the field, leading to her death at the hospital after ten days.

3. I heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

Submissions on behalf of the Petitioners.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the Petitioners are innocent and have falsely been implicated in this case. He further submits that the allegation as made against the petitioners is general and omnibus in nature. There is no specific allegation who caused what injury to the alleged victim.

5. He further submits that the petitioners have got no criminal antecedents and have not moved this Court earlier either for anticipatory bail or regular one in the instant case.

6. He further submits that the petitioners/accused side have lodged Manjhi P.S. Case No. 369 of 2024 on 17.11.2024, itself against the informant and his family members for the offences punishable under Sections 115(2), 126(2), 76, 109, 352, 351(2), 351(3) and 3(5) of BNS, 2023, whereas the informant has lodged the present case as a counter blast in regard to the same occurrence after ten days.

7. He also submits that process under Section 82, 83 Cr.PC, corresponding to Sections 84 and 85 B.N.S.S. respectively, have been taken by the Police during pendency of the anticipatory bail petition before the District Court as well as this Court. Hence, they could not be held to be avoiding warrants of arrest. They moved the courts of law for the anticipatory bail under the law of the land and, hence, process under Sections 82, 83 Cr.PC/Sections 84 and 85 B.N.S.S should not come in the way of grant of anticipatory bail.

Submissions on behalf of the State

8. Learned APP for the State however, vehemently opposes the prayer of the Petitioners for anticipatory bail submitting that the present anticipatory bail petition is not maintainable, in view of the process taken under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.PC, corresponding to Sections 84 and 85 of BNSS, 2023 respectively, against the petitioners. The petitioners have been declared absconder and their property has been attached. He further submits that the allegation is serious in nature and corroborated by the Postmortem report, as per which the deceased has died due to shock and haemorrhage on account of the injury caused by hard and blunt substance.

Section 438 Cr.PC/Section 482 B.N.S.S. and Sections 82 and 83 Cr.PC/Sections 84 and 85 B.N.S.S.

9. Before I proceed to consider the prayer of the Petitioners for grant of anticipatory Bail, it is imperative to discuss whether anticipatory bail petition is maintainable in view of the proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 Cr.PC, corresponding to Sections 84 and 85 B.N.S.S respectively. This question is not res- integra. Hon’ble Supreme Court has considered this question on several occasions:

10. In Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), (2012) 8 SCC 730 the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held as follows:

“12.………………………Normally, when the accused is “absconding” and declared as a “proclaimed offender”, there is no question of granting anticipatory bail. We reiterate that when a person against whom a warrant had been issued and is absconding or