Court Can't Direct Arrest Of Accused Ordinarily While Dismissing Anticipatory Bail Plea : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has observed that a mandatory direction to arrest the accused cannot be issued by a Court ordinarily while rejecting his petition for anticipatory bail.When the prayer for pre-arrest bail is declined, it is for the investigating agency to take further steps in the matter, the bench comprising Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha Bose observed.The court was considering a Special Leave Petition in which it was contended that the High Court was not justified in directing arrest of the accused-petitioner while rejecting his prayer for pre-arrest bail. The petitioner relied on the judgment in M. C. Abraham and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.: (2003) 2 SCC 649.Referring to the said judgment, the bench observed:There is no quarrel with the proposition that ordinarily, no such mandatory order or directions should be issued while rejecting the application for pre-arrest bail that the accused person has to be arrested; and such an aspect is required to be left for the investigating agency to examine, and to take such steps as may be permissible in law and as may be required.However, in this case, the court noted that the High Court, after having found no case for grant of pre-arrest bail, has otherwise not given any such direction of mandatory nature, as was noticed in the case of M. C. Abraham (Supra). The observations are essentially of the reasons assigned by the High Court in declining the prayer of the petitioner for pre-arrest bail, the bench noted.While dismissing the SLP, the bench observed thus: "Of course, when the prayer for pre-arrest bail is declined, it is for the investigating agency to take further steps in the matter. Whether the investigating agency requires custodial interrogation or not, is also to be primarily examined by that agency alone. We say no more."In M. C. Abraham (Supra), the Supreme Court had made the following observation:The Court may or may not grant anticipatory bail depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case and the material placed before the Court. There may, however, be cases where the application for grant of anticipatory bail may be rejected and ultimately, after investigation, the said person may not be put up for trial as no material is disclosed against him in the course of investigation. The High Court proceeded on the assumption that since petitions for anticipatory bail had been rejected, there was no option open for the State but to arrest those persons. This assumption, to our mind, is erroneous. A person whose petition for grant of anticipatory bail has been rejected may or may not be arrested by the investigating officer depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case, nature of the offence, the background of the accused, the facts disclosed in the course of investigation and other relevant considerations.Case detailsS. Senthil Kumar vs State of Tamil Nadu | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 314 | SLP (Crl) 2693/2022 | 24 March 2022Coram: Justices Dinesh Maheshwari and Aniruddha BoseHeadnotesCode of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 438 - Anticipatory Bail - Ordinarily, no such mandatory order or directions should be issued while rejecting the application for pre-arrest bail that the accused person has to be arrested [Referred to M. C. Abraham and Anr. v. State of Maharashtra and Ors.: (2003) 2 SCC 649] -When the prayer for pre-arrest bail is declined, it is for the investigating agency to take further steps in the matter. Whether the investigating agency requires custodial interrogation or not, is also to be primarily examined by that agency alone. We say no moreSummary - SLP Against Madras HC Judgment dismissing anticipatory bail with some observations about requirement of custodial interrogation- Dismissed - High Court, after having found no case for grant of pre-arrest bail, has otherwise not given any such direction of mandatory nature - Observations are essentially of the reasons assigned by the High Court in declining the prayer of the petitioner for pre-arrest bail.Click here to Read/Download Order

Court Can't Direct Arrest Of Accused Ordinarily While Dismissing Anticipatory Bail Plea : Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Court Can't Direct Arrest Of Accused Ordinarily While Dismissing Anticipatory Bail Plea : Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers