Despite Our Order, Allahabad & Uttarakhand HCs Keep Passing 'No Coercive Steps' Orders In Quashing Petitions: Supreme Court

Mehal Jain

23 Aug 2021 9:08 AM GMT

In its Neeharika judgement in April, SC had declared that while refusing to quash FIRs, HCs shall not pass an order 'not to arrest' and/or 'no coercive steps'.

The Supreme Court on Monday commented that despite its April judgment in Neeharika Infrastructure v. State of Maharashtra, the High Courts of Allahabad and Uttarakhand, in particular, keep passing 'no coercive steps' orders on quashing pleas even in serious matters.The bench of Justices D. Y. Chandrachud and M. R. Shah was hearing an SLP arising out of a July order of the Uttarakhand High...

The Supreme Court on Monday commented that despite its April judgment in Neeharika Infrastructure v. State of Maharashtra, the High Courts of Allahabad and Uttarakhand, in particular, keep passing 'no coercive steps' orders on quashing pleas even in serious matters.

The bench of Justices D. Y. Chandrachud and M. R. Shah was hearing an SLP arising out of a July order of the Uttarakhand High Court where, in a petition for quashing an FIR alleging the offence under section 302, IPC, the High Court granted time to surrender to the accused till August 10, with a further direction for the bail to be decided the same day.

The bench recorded,

"In a petition for quashing of an FIR alleging the offence under section 302, IPC, the High Court recorded that the petition for quashing is not pressed, but on the grounds that the prayers before it are 'innocuous', the High Court granted time to surrender until August 10, with the further direction for the bail to be decided on the same day"

"This is a serious matter. The FIR is under 302; And the way the High Court has dealt with it!", remarked Justice Chandrachud at the outset.

"Despite our order in Neeharika, we find that the Allahabad and Uttarakhand High Courts keep passing such 'no coercive steps' orders. We have said that no such order can be passed and still the High Courts are just passing such an order!", added Justice Shah.

"And why this anxiety of the High Court for the same day, same day, same day (for the bail to be decided the same day)?", continued the judge.

"Yes, the High Court says that if it is refused, the Sessions Judge is to also deal with bail expeditiously.", noted Justice Chandrachud.

"Not expeditiously, brother, but on the same day!", pointed out Justice Shah.

"It is a shocking order! And that too in a 302 case!", said Justice Chandrachud.

The bench proceeded to dictate its order, issuing notice to the counsel for the state of Uttarakhand, returnable on September 3.

In its April judgment in Neeharika's case, the Supreme Court bench of Justices Chandrachud, Shah and Sanjeev Khanna had held that High Court while dismissing/disposing of the quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India., shall not pass order of not to arrest and/or "no coercive steps" either during the investigation or till the investigation is completed and/or till the final report/charge sheet is filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C.

"We caution the High Courts again against passing such orders of not to arrest or "no coercive steps to be taken" till the investigation is completed and the final report is filed, while not entertaining quashing petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or Article 226 of the Constitution of India", the Supreme Court held in the case Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. vs. State of Maharashtra.

Case Title: Praveen Salar v. The State of Uttarakhand & Ors.

Click Here To Read/ Download Order

Despite Our Order, Allahabad & Uttarakhand HCs Keep Passing 'No Coercive Steps' Orders In Quashing Petitions: Supreme Court

Mehal Jain

In its Neeharika judgement in April, SC had declared that while refusing to quash FIRs, HCs shall not pass an order 'not to arrest' and/or 'no coercive steps'.

Tags