Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(SC) 603

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, M.M. SUNDRESH, JJ.
SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL – Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. – Respondent(s)
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5191 of 2021
Decided On : 07-10-2021

Advocates appeared:
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv. Mr. Akbar Siddique, AOR Mr. Rajneesh Chuni, Adv. Mr. Malik Javed Ansari, Adv. Mr. Chirag Madan, Adv. Mr. Hardik Rupal, Adv. Mr. Parv Garg, Adv. Mr. Adeel Talib, Adv. Mr. Fareed Siddiqui, Adv. Mr. Shashank Gaurav, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. S.V. Raju, Ld. ASG Ms. Sairica Raju, Adv. Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv. Ms. Priyanka Das, Adv. Mr. Udai Khanna, Adv. Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR Mr.Vikram Chaudhary, Sr. Adv. Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv. Mr. Pranjal Krishna, Adv. Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR Mr. Vikram Chaudhri, Sr. Adv. Mr. Harshit Sethi, Adv. Mr. Keshavam Chaudhri, Adv. Ms. Anzu. K. Varkey, AOR Ms. Ria Khanna, Adv. Mr. Kapil Dahiya, Adv.

IMPORTANT POINT
In determining whether to grant bail both aspects have to be taken into account: a) seriousness of charge and b) severity of punishment

Headnote:
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 439 – Categorisation of offences for grant of bail – In determining whether to grant bail both aspects have to be taken into account: a) seriousness of charge and b) severity of punishment – It is not as if economic offences are completely taken out of the guidelines but do form a different nature of offences and thus seriousness of charge has to be taken into account but simultaneously, severity of punishment imposed by statute would also be a factor – Copy of this order be circulated to Registrars of different High Courts to be further circulated to trial Courts so that unnecessary bail matters do not come up to this Court.
Result : Guidelines issued.

Judgement Key Points

Certainly. Based on the provided legal document, here are the key points:

When considering the grant of bail, courts must evaluate two main aspects: the seriousness of the charge and the severity of the punishment that may be imposed (!) .
The guidelines issued recognize that economic offences are of a different nature but do not exclude them from the general principles; both the seriousness of the charge and the potential punishment are relevant factors (!) (!) .
The categorization of offences is as follows:
Category A: Offences punishable with imprisonment of 7 years or less, excluding certain other categories (!) .
Category B and D: Offences punishable with death, life imprisonment, or more than 7 years of imprisonment (!) (!) .
Category C: Offences under specific statutes with stringent bail provisions, such as NDPS, PMLA, UAPA, Companies Act, and POSCO (!) (!) .
Certain preconditions must be met for bail eligibility, including that the accused was not arrested during investigation and has cooperated throughout the process (!) (!) .
For offences in Category A, bail considerations include the stage after filing the chargesheet, with procedures such as summons, bailable warrants, and non-bailable warrants outlined [p_14–p_19].
For offences in Categories B and D, bail is to be decided on the merits upon the accused’s appearance in court (!) .
Additional conditions apply for offences under special statutes, requiring compliance with specific legal provisions (!) .
The trial courts and high courts are advised to follow these guidelines while considering bail applications, keeping in mind that non-cooperation or failure to appear can negate the benefits of these guidelines (!) .
Courts may grant interim bail based on the conduct of the accused during investigation, even when issuing notices to consider bail (!) .
The guidelines emphasize that economic offences are not entirely excluded from bail considerations but are subject to the same principles, with particular attention to the nature of the offence and the punishment involved (!) (!) .
The purpose of these guidelines is to streamline bail applications and prevent unnecessary cases from reaching higher courts, without restricting the courts’ discretionary powers (!) (!) .
The guidelines are intended to aid courts but do not fetter their authority to decide bail on a case-by-case basis (!) .

Please let me know if you need further analysis or specific legal advice based on these points.

ORDER

Application for intervention is allowed.

2. We have been provided assistance both by Mr. S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General and Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned senior counsel and there is broad unanimity in terms of the suggestions made by learned ASG. In terms of the suggestions, the offences have been categorized and guidelines are sought to be laid down for grant of bail, without fettering the discretion of the courts concerned and keeping in mind the statutory provisions.

3. We are inclined to accept the guidelines and make them a part of the order of the Court for the benefit of the Courts below. The guidelines are as under :

“Categories/Types of Offences

B) Offences punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for more than 7 years.

C) Offences punishable under Special Acts containing stringent provisions for bail like NDPS (S.37), PMLA (S.45), UAPA (S.43D(5), Companies Act, 212(6), etc.

D) Economic offences not covered by Special Acts.

REQUISITE CONDITIONS

1) Not arrested during investigation.

2) Cooperated throughout in the investigation including appearing before Investigating Officer whenever called.

(No need to forward such an accused along with the chargesheet (Siddharth Vs. State of UP, 2021 SCC online SC 615)

CATEGORY A

After filing of chargesheet/complaint taking of cognizance

a) Ordinary summons at the 1st instance/including permitting appearance through Lawyer.

b) If such an accused does not appear despite service of summons, then Bailable Warrant for physical appearance may be issued.

c) NBW on failure to failure to appear despite issuance of Bailable Warrant.

d) NBW may be cancelled or converted into a Bailable Warrant/Summons without insisting physical appearance of accused, if such an application is moved on behalf of the accused before execution of the NBW on an undertaking of the accused to appear physically on the next date/s of hearing.

e) Bail applications of such accused on appearance may be decided w/o the accused being taken in physical custody or by granting interim bail till the bail application is decided.

CATEGORY B/D

On appearance of the accused in Court pursuant to process issued bail application to be decided on merits.

CATEGORY C

Same as Category B & D with the additional condition of compliance of the provisions of Bail uner NDPS S. 37, 45 PMLA, 212(6) Companies Act 43 d(5) of UAPA, POSCO etc.”

4. Needless to say that the category A deals with both police cases and complaint cases.

5. The trial Courts and the High Courts will keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines while considering bail applications. The caveat which has been put by learned ASG is that where the accused have not cooperated in the investigation nor appeared before the Investigating Officers, nor answered summons when the Court feels that judicial custody of the accused is necessary for the completion of the trial, where further investigation including a possible recovery is needed, the aforesaid approach cannot give them benefit, something we agree with.

6. We may also notice an aspect submitted by Mr. Luthra that while issuing notice to consider bail, the trial Court is not precluded from granting interim bail taking into consideration the conduct of the accused during the investigation which has not warranted arrest. On this aspect also we would give our imprimatur and naturally the bail application to be ultimately considered, would be guided by the statutory provisions.

7. The suggestions of learned ASG which we have adopted have categorized a separate set of offences as “economic Offences” not covered by the special Acts. In this behalf, suffice to say on the submission of Mr. Luthra that this Court in Sanjay Chandra vs.CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40 has observed in para 39 that in determining whether to grant bail both aspects have to be taken into account:

b) severity of punishment.

8. Thus, it is no

Click Here to Read the rest of this document

2021 Supreme(SC) 603

SUPREME COURT OF INDIASANJAY KISHAN KAUL, M.M. SUNDRESH, JJ.SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL – Petitioner(s)VERSUSCENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. – Respondent(s)Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5191 of 2021Decided On : 07-10-2021

IMPORTANT POINTIn determining whether to grant bail both aspects have to be taken into account: a) seriousness of charge and b) severity of punishment

Cases Referred (1)

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
SANJAY KISHAN KAUL, M.M. SUNDRESH, JJ.
SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL – Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. – Respondent(s)
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5191 of 2021
Decided On : 07-10-2021

IMPORTANT POINT
In determining whether to grant bail both aspects have to be taken into account: a) seriousness of charge and b) severity of punishment