The filing of a charge sheet does not constitute an ipso facto cause for arrest if no justification for arrest existed during the investigation, and judicial intent aims to ease and enlarge the scope of bail rather than restrict it.

For parties:-

Mr. Mahesh Jethmalani, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Ravi Sharma, AOR

Mr. Anjani Kumar Rai, Adv.

Mr. Sandeep Kapoor, Adv.

Mr. Wedo Khalo, Adv.

Ms. Awyan Mangla, Adv.

Mr. Anjani Kumar Rai, Adv.

Ms. Mugdha Pande, Adv.

Ms. Madhulika Rai Sharma, Adv.

Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Akbar Siddique, AOR

Mr. Chirag Madan, Adv.

Mr. M. Fareed Siddiqui, Adv.

Mr. Shashank Gaurav, Adv.

Mr. Lakshya Mehta, Adv.

Mr. Hardik Rupal, Adv.

Mr. Rajneesh Chuni, Adv.

Mr. Vikram Choudhri, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Keshavam Choudhri, Adv.

Ms. Anzu. K. Varkey, AOR

Ms. Ria Khanna, Adv.

Mr. Rishi Sehgal, Adv.

Mr. Kapil Dahiya, Adv.

Mr. S.V. Raju, Ld. ASG

Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv.

Ms. Priyanka Das, Adv.

Mr. Udai Khanna, Adv.

Mr. Mohammed Akhil, Adv.

Mr. Ritwiz Rishabh, Adv.

Dr. D.V. Rao, Adv.

Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR

Intervener Mr. Siddharth Aggarwal, Sr. Adv.

Ms. Stuti Gujral, Adv.

Mr. Sahil Ghai, Adv.

Mr. Abhinav Sekri, Adv.

Mr. Vishwajeet Singh, Adv.

Ms. Rurali Patil, Adv.

Ms. Priyashree Sharma P.H., Adv.

Ms. Rushali Agarwal, Adv.

Mr. Syed Faraz Alam, Adv.

Mr. Kush Chaturvedi, AOR

Intervener Mr. Amit Desai, Sr. Adv.

Mr. S. Mahesh Sahasranaman, Adv.

Mr. Arjun Garg, AOR

Ms. Pooja Kothari, Adv.

Mr. Gopal Krishna Shenoy, Adv.

Mr. Aakash Nandolia, Adv.

Ms. Sagun Srivastava, Adv.

Mr. E. C. Agrawala, AOR

UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

O R D E R

IA NOS.164370 & 164760/2021- APPLICATIONS FOR INTERVENTION

The applications are allowed.

MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION NO.1849/2021 IN SLP(Crl) No. 5191/2021 &

MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION Diary No.29164/2021 IN SLP(Crl) No. 5191/2021

Learned senior counsels for parties state that they will endeavour to work out some of the fine tuning which is required to give meaning to the intent of our order dated 07.10.2021.

We make it clear that our intent was to ease the process of bail and not to restrict it. The order, in no way, imposes any additional fetters but is in furtherance of the line of judicial thinking to enlarge the scope of bail.

At this stage, suffice for us to say that while referring to category ‘C’, inadvertently, Section 45 of Prevention of Money laundering Act (PMLA) has been mentioned which has been struck down by this Court. Learned ASG states that an amendment was made and that is pending challenge before this Court before a different Bench. That would be a matter to be considered by that Bench.

We are also putting a caution that merely by categorizing certain offences as economic offences which may be non-cognizable, it does not mean that a different meaning is to be given to our order.

We may also clarify that if during the course of investigation, there has been no cause to arrest the accused, merely because a charge sheet is filed, would not be an ipso facto cause to arrest the petitioner, an aspect in general clarified by us in Criminal Appeal No.838/2021 – Siddharth v. State of Uttar Pradesh & Anr. dated 16.08.2021.

List on 20.01.2022.