Anticipatory bail can be granted based on the presumption of innocence and the specifics of each case, not limited to exceptional circumstances.

ORDER :

Bail App No. 156/2024

1. The petitioners have approached this Court invoking its jurisdiction under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , 2023 (hereinafter to be referred as BNSS for short) for grant of pre arrest bail in their favour in case FIR No. 68/2024 registered with Police Station, Kandi, Rajouri under Sections 354, 147, 323, 336 and 504 IPC on the grounds inter alia that they are innocent and have not committed alleged offences; that actually there is a land dispute going on between the petitioners and respondent No. 2, regarding which some litigation is also going on before the civil and revenue courts; that respondent No. 2/complainant has got the FIR registered on the basis of false and frivolous complaint just to pressurize the petitioners so as to succumb to his illegitimate demands; that they are peace loving citizens believing in law and they have never committed the alleged offences; that respondent No. 1 is bent upon to effect their arrest in connection with false and frivolous complaint; that they are members of the same family who have been facing humiliation and harassment since registration of FIR; that they shall be greatly humiliated in the estimation of the society in case respondent No. 1 succeeds in effecting their arrest; that some of the petitioners are senior citizens and that they shall abide by any of the conditions that may be imposed by this Court.

2. Issue notice to the respondents, returnable within a period of four weeks, subject to taking of steps within a period of one week.

3. Mr. Bhanu Jasrotia, learned Government Advocate accepts notice on behalf of respondent No. 1. Notice shall go to respondent No. 2 only.

4. Heard learned counsel for the petitioners who submitted that the petitioners are innocent and have not committed any offence. That the respondent/UT is bent upon to arrest them in connection with false and frivolous allegations. That they are likely to suffer in terms of their reputation in the estimation of the society in case respondent No. 1 succeeds in arresting the petitioners. Learned counsel further submitted that law has armed this Court and even the Sessions courts with extraordinary powers in terms of Section 482 of new Code i.e. BNSS , 2023 corresponding to Section 438 of the repealed Code in order to protect those who genuinely apprehend their involvement on the basis of false and frivolous complaints. Learned counsel invited the attention of this Court towards a landmark judgment of the Apex Court cited as Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre Vs State of Maharastra decided on 02/12/2010, AIR 2011 SC 312 and submitted on the basis of reliance on the said authoritative judgment that the Hon’ble Apex Court has widened the scope of the personal liberty and has held that pre-arrest bail cannot only be claimed in extra-ordinary circumstances but in all the cases where the court is satisfied in the facts and circumstances of the case that there is no need of the accused in custody during investigation. He submitted that it has also been held in case concerned that pre-arrest bail need not to be granted for a limited period and that the Hon’ble Apex Court held its earlier judgments on the subject i.e Chain Lal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh (1976) 4 SCC 572 ; Salau-ud-din Abdul Samad Sheikh vs State of Maharastra AIR 1996 SC 1042 ; K.L, Verma vs state and another 1996 (7) SCALE 20 ; Sunita Devi vs State of Bihar and another AIR @))% SC 498; 2005 AIR (Criminal) 112; Adri Dharan Das vs state of West Bengal AIR 2005 SC 1057 and Naresh Kumar Yadoo vs Ravinder Kumar and others 2008 AIR (SC 218) decided on 23rd October 2007, as per incuriam.

5. Learned Government Advocate, Mr. Bhanu Jasrotia submitted that the petitioners do not deserve any concession of pre arrest bail which is made to protect those only who genuinely apprehend their arrest in connection with false and frivolous allegations as according to him, the petitioners are involved in commission of offences under th