IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that the issuance of non-bailable warrants and proceedings under Section 82 of the Code negate the entitlement to anticipatory bail.

JUDGMENT :

Ravindra Maithani, J.

Applicant seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No.0031 of 2023, under Sections 120-B, 504, 506, 386, 389 IPC, Police Station Muni Ki Reti, District Tehri Garhwal.

2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.

3. According to the FIR, the informant was in strained relations with his wife. It is this time, when the co-accused entered into the life of the informant. They both came close to each other. The FIR records that the co-accused extorted huge money from the informant by blackmailing him or threatening him. There are allegations against the applicant that it is he also, who blackmailed and threatened the informant. The informant was threatened that in case money is not given, the co-accused would implicate the informant in false cases of rape.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the co-accused has already been granted anticipatory bail; the applicant did appear before the Investigating Officer (“IO”) on 18.10.2023. Subsequent to it, one Miss Rajni forwarded an affidavit to the applicant for his signature, to which the applicant was not agreeable. Thereafter, the IO called the applicant on 08.12.2023. It is argued that the applicant has always been ready and willing to co-operate with the investigation, but he was threatened to sign the affidavit. It is thereafter the applicant filed anticipatory bail application before the court below, which was rejected on 29.01.2024, and again, the anticipatory bail application was filed in this Court on 22.02.2024. Therefore, it is argued that it is a case fit for anticipatory bail.

5. Learned counsel for the informant would submit that in the instant case, Non-Bailable Warrants have already been issued against the applicant on 16.02.2024, when his anticipatory bail application had already been rejected by the court below. Now, processes under Section 82 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code”) have also been issued. It is argued that since Non-Bailable Warrants and processes under Section 82 of the Code have already been issued against the applicant, the anticipatory bail application deserves to be rejected. It is argued that when the applicant filed anticipatory bail application, no ad-interim order was passed by the Court.

6. Learned counsel for the informant would submit that in view of the judgment in the case of Srikant Upadhyay and Others Vs. State of Bihar, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 282, the applicant is not entitled to anticipatory bail. He would refer to Para 24 and 25 of the judgment, wherein the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in Para 24, observed that, “In other words, it is made clear that in the absence of any interim order, pendency of an application for anticipatory bail shall not bar the Trial Court in issuing/proceeding with steps for proclamation and in taking steps under Section 83, Cr. P.C., in accordance with law.” In Para 25, the Hon’ble Supreme Court, in that case, has observed that, “At any rate, when warrant of arrest or proclamation is issued, the applicant is not entitled to invoke the extraordinary power. Certainly, this will not deprive the power of the Court to grant pre-arrest bail in extreme, exceptional cases in the interest of justice”.

7. On it, learned counsel for the applicant would submit that it is an exceptional case in which the applicant deserves anticipatory bail. Because, it is argued that in the instant case, the IO had been compelling him to sign an affidavit, which was sent through some Rajni at the behest of the informant, and it is, thereafter, the anticipatory bail application is filed.

8. Learned State Counsel, under instructions, would submit that Non-Bailable Warrants and proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. have already been issued. She would submit that merely based on some communication between the applicant and some Rajni, it may not be inferred that the IO was compelling the applicant to sign some affidavit. She would submit that on 18.10.2023, when the applicant appeared alon