A. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 323, 341, 506, 498-A -- Second anticipatory bail – FIR by second wife -- Subsequent event -- Merely because an FIR lodged by the previous wife of the petitioner/accused against him was quashed on the basis of compromise subsequent to decision of the first pre-arrest bail petition on merits, is not a substantial ground to entitle him to file the second pre-arrest bail petition.

(Para 6)

B. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 323, 341, 506, 498-A -- Second anticipatory bail – Subsequent event -- Pending inquiry before the Women Cell at the time of lodging of the FIR, is not a subsequent event that could afford a ground to the petitioner to file the second pre-arrest bail petition.

(Para 7)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 307, 440 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Attempt to murder -- Anticipatory bail – Contention that injury report indicates that the injuries were of a simple nature caused by a hard and blunt object -- In the facts and circumstances of the case direction given that in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail.

(Para 3-6)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Anticipatory bail – Dismiss in default -- Bail application listed in the first instance on 02.07.2021 and interim protection was granted -- Thereafter the matter came before the Court almost after an year on 27.09.2022 and because of his non-appearance bail application was dismissed for non-prosecution – Dismissal of the bail application in default not justified and, accordingly set aside.

(Para 3-7)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Cheque bounce case – Conditional bail in Appeal subject to deposit 20% amount -- Non-payment of – Anticipatory bail – Maintainability of -- A person released on bail is already in constructive custody of law – Anticipatory bail is not maintainable. Manish Jain’s case 2022(1) SCC(Cri) 676 relied.

(Para 5-7)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 467, 468, 471, 120(B), 420 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Anticipatory bail – Condition to deposit 50% of salary – Sustainability of -- Allegation of fabricating documents and using them to obtain employment – High Court granted anticipatory bail with the condition that 50% of the salary earned by him for entire duration of the employment ought to be deposited within six months – Held, imposition of the condition is too onerous and cannot be sustained -- Condition set aside, petitioner ordered to be released on anticipatory bail.

(Para 1-3)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 406, 420 – Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, (28 of 1961), Section 3, 4 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Anticipatory bail -- Respondent granted anticipatory bail subject to deposit of Rs. 75,000/- on offer made by him – Co-accused paid Rs.6,00,000/- to the petitioner to get concession of bail – Held, process of criminal law cannot be utilised for arm-twisting and money recovery, particularly while opposing the prayer for bail -- Recovery of money is essentially within the realm of civil proceedings – Criminal proceedings are being prosecuted only as money recovery proceedings -- Hence, the order granting pre-arrest bail to the respondents stands affirmed but, the condition therein, of payment of Rs.75,000/- by the respondent No.2, stands annulled.

(Para 10-16)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Constitution of India, Article 136 -- Cheating – Anticipatory bail -- Complainant entered into an agreement to sell the property, and that despite obtaining more than Rs. 5 lakhs for executing that agreement, the petitioner executed a General Power of Attorney in favour of someone else for the same property – Dispute is also the subject matter of civil proceedings and suits for permanent injunction and specific performance are pending -- Petitioner was granted interim protection since the date of first hearing i.e. 08.07.2021 – SLP allowed, petitioner directed to be enlarged on bail.

(Para 1-4)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Anticipatory bail -- Cheating and forgery -- Charge sheet submitted against the appellant -- State did not bring any material to show that there is necessity of custodial interrogation of the appellant – Appeal allowed, direction given that in the event of the arrest of the appellant, he shall be released on bail.

(Para 1-5)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 420, 120-B -- Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955), Section 3(2)(D), 7 -- Fertilizer (Control) Order 1985, Clause/Section 12 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Anticipatory bail -- Manufacturing fertilizer without any licence -- Appellant disclosed that he is cooperating with the investigating agency -- State also apprised that the appellant has attended the police station on 08.07.2022 – No necessity of custodial interrogation -- Appeal allowed, direction given that in the event of arrest of the appellant, he shall be released on bail.

(Para 1-4)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 376, 420 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Anticipatory bail -- Rape -- Petitioner married the complainant though he had not obtained a divorce from a prior marriage – Charge-sheet submitted, after investigation – Interim stay confirmed -- In the event of the arrest, petitioner ordered to be released on bail.

(Para 1-5)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Anticipatory bail – Maintainability of – Arrest in another case -- Since the applicant is in custody in connection with another case, the present anticipatory bail application u/s 438 Cr.P.C. would not lie and would not be maintainable.

(Para 12)

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Section 3(1)(3), 14, 14A(2), 18 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Offence under SC/ST Act – Anticipatory bail – Jurisdiction of High Court -- The word bail in section 14A(2) would include anticipatory bail also – Firstly, the accused should have approached the Special Court for grant of anticipatory bail u/s 438 of the Cr.P.C. -- Appellate jurisdiction alone can be exercised by the High Court, order granting or rejecting the anticipatory bail u/s SC/ST Act shall be amenable to the appellate jurisdiction of the High Court u/s 14A of the Act and not Section 438 Cr.P.C.

(Para 13-26)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 15, 29 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- NDPS case – Anticipatory bail -- Disclosure statement -- Recovery of 1.700 kilograms of Chura Doda Post from co-acused – Petitioner named in disclosure statement -- It is a settled principle of law that anticipatory bail cannot be granted to an accused who has been named in the disclosure statement of the arrested accused -- No merit, petition dismissed.

(Para 6-10)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Anticipatory Bail – 72 hours’ notice before arrest – Direction given by the High Court to the State that 72 hours’ notice should be given to the first respondent in the event that the State finds it necessary to arrest him in connection with any complaint pertaining to a cognizable offence at the behest of the Joint Registrar (Audit) is manifestly incorrect in law -- Such a direction could not have been issued by the High Court, accordingly vacated and set aside.

(Para 1-3)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 120B, 167, 218, 330, 323, 195, 348, 365, 477A, 506 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Kidnapping/ Abduction -- Anticipatory bail -- While granting anticipatory bail to the respondents/ accused, the High Court neither considered the allegations against the respective accused nor the role played by them nor the position held by them at the time of registering the FIR in the year 1994 nor the role played by them during the investigation -- High Court has also not taken note of the recommendations made by the Committee headed by a former Judge of Supreme Court – Appeals allowed, impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court quashed and set aside -- Anticipatory Bail Applications remitted to the High Court to decide the same afresh in accordance with law and on their own merits.

(Para 5-8)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 82, 482 – Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138, 142 – Cheque bounce case -- Quashing of order declaring accused proclaimed person – Submitted that the petitioner was never served with the summons and has now come to know about the pendency of the complaint and he is ready to surrender before the trial Court and face the trial -- Issuance of notice of motion to respondents dispensed with, petition allowed, impugned order declaring the petitioner a proclaimed persons, set aside -- Petitioner directed to appear before the trial Court within a period of 15 days and on doing so, the trial Court will release him on bail -- Till then arrest stayed.

(Para 1-5)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 376B, 376(2)(N), 506, 34 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Rape – Anticipatory bail -- Petitioner is a doctor in a government hospital where the complainant was allegedly working as a nurse -- FIR indicates that parties were in a physical relationship since May 2016 -- FIR was lodged in October 2017 -- In the facts and circumstances of the case, custodial interrogation is not required – Direction given in the event of the arrest of the petitioner, he shall be released on bail.

(Para 1-6)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 306 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Abetment to suicide – Anticipatory bail -- Suicide note show that the deceased was under extreme stress and tension on account of matrimonial discord and on account of pendency of some litigation pertaining to grant of maintenance -- It will certainly be debatable as to whether the aforesaid conduct as mentioned in the suicide note would qualify to be termed as an abetment to commit suicide -- Petitioner has joined investigation and she is not required for any custodial interrogation -- Petitioner not involved in any other case -- Interim directions made absolute.

(Para 5-8)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 306, 34 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Abetment to suicide – Anticipatory bail – Compromise between parties – On an earlier occasion, anticipatory bail of co-accused was dismissed – Considering the fact that the petitioners and the complainant belong to the same family and they have reconciled the things, petition allowed – Petitioners granted the concession of anticipatory bail subject to the conditions envisaged under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.

(Para 8)

A. Constitution of India, Article 19(1), 21 – Life and liberty – Arrest of accused -- Object of arrest is neither punitive nor preventive -- It has become very common to put criminal law in motion even though dispute involved is purely contractual or civil in nature -- Many times arrest entails deprivation of source of income of entire family besides forever stigma in a closely knit society like ours -- There is neither mechanism to compensate a man who is later on found innocent nor acquittal can return valuable time, energy, status, future of family members especially children which is lost on account of incarceration of bread earner of the family -- Detention or arrest not only deprives a person from his fundamental right of personal liberty guaranteed by Article 21 but also freedom guaranteed by Article 19(1) of our Constitution --  Life of every human being is most precious gift of God and everyone has very limited span of life which cannot be spoiled on account of incompetence, personal grudge, vengeance of someone; or brutal, illegal, unethical action of the State machinery.

(Para 5)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 365, 302, 328, 201, 34 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 82, 446, 482 -- Constitution of India,  Section 21 – Murder trial -- Jump of bail – Quashing of Non-bailable warrants/ Cancellation of bail bond. Held,

i) The object of cancellation of bond or declaration of anyone as proclaimed offender/person is to secure his presence. The petitioner has come forward to face trial and undertakes to appear before trial court on each and every date, thus, his presence would meet ends of justice;

ii) The Petitioner for wasting valuable time and energy of courts as well prosecution is willing to pay costs of Rs. 10,000/-;

iii) The Petitioner is ready to furnish bond/surety to the satisfaction of the trial court;

iv) The petitioner is resident of Jagraon and trial is pending at Ludhiana, thus jurisdictional court and police authorities have direct access over the activities of the petitioner.

v) The petitioner was initially granted regular bail by this Hon'ble High Court;

vi) Trial is pending since 2017 and petitioner is ready to face trial, thus, no prejudice is going to cause to prosecution or complainant;

Petition allowed, petitioner directed to appear before Trial Court on 09.12.2022 and furnish fresh bail bond/surety bond to its satisfaction.

(Para 1-5)

Punjab Excise Act, 1914 (Punjab Act 1 of 1914), Sections 61, 1, 14 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Excise matter – Anticipatory bail – Petitioner has no criminal antecedents – Allegations are transporting alcohol, which is the State’s privilege, without paying the revenue and in violation of the State’s Excise Policy -- Given the sentence prescribed, the nature of evidence, and other factors and circumstances peculiar to the case, it may be appropriate to afford the petitioner a final opportunity to course-correct -- Maximum sentence imposable for the offences mentioned in FIR does not exceed seven years – Petitioner makes a case for bail -- Petition allowed.

(Para 2-9, 24)

A. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Sections 3, 14-A (2) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 323, 452, 506, 34 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438(2), 482 -- Anticipatory bail under SC/ST Act -- Complaint/FIR should disclose the caste of the offenders alone, it should disclose that the appellants-accused were aware about the caste of the complainant as well – The element of intentional, insult or intimidation with intent to humiliate a member of Scheduled Caste or Scheduled Tribe in public view, should clearly be borne out from the FIR -- Merely uttering such words in the absence of intention/mens-rea to humiliate the complainant in public view, every such quarrel or altercation between the members of non-scheduled caste & scheduled caste and if the imputations are grossly vague and perfunctory, would not, ipso facto, constitute acts of commission of offence, which are capable of cognizance under the Act -- All the essential/basic ingredients of the offence are deeply lacking in the complaint, which formed the basis of FIR -- Appellants directed to join investigation and in the event of their arrest, they shall be released on bail and shall abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Para 8-11)

B. Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Sections 3 -- Offence under SC/ST Act -- Common tendency and frequency of the complainants of involving and roping the accused on vague & bald allegations under Section 3 of the SC & ST Act, have been tremendously increasing day-by-day in our society -- Even the plain and simple occurrence under the Indian Penal Code is given the colour of offence under Section 3 of the special Act by adding false and vague allegations -- This tendency needs to be curbed -- If not discouraged, in that eventuality, it will ultimately weaken those true cases of the prosecution as well even against the real culprits and the very object and purpose of the Act, would pale into insignificance in this relevant behalf.

(Para 9)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Anticipatory bail – Condition to deposit salary – Sustainability of -- High Court granted pre-arrest bail on the condition that she will return the salary which she has received while working as a Panchayat Teacher – Held condition of returning the amount drawn by her as salary on appointment as Panchayat Teacher is neither justified nor required under the law while grant of pre-arrest bail to her, condition set aside.

(Para 2-5)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 446-A -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 399, 402, 34 -- Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959), Section 25 – Absence from Trial – Cancellation of bail -- Petitioner on bail was regularly appearing before the trial Court, however, on account of noting a wrong date, he absented and his bail/surety bonds were forfeited and non-bailable warrants were issued – Petitioner directed to appear before the trial Court within a period of 15 days and he will be released on bail subject to his furnishing fresh bail/surety bonds.

(Para 1-5)

A. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012), Section 7, 8, 9, 11 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 354A(1)(i),(ii) & (iv), 354 A-(2) and 354-A(3) -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 164, 438 -- POCSO matter – Anticipatory bail –While granting bail High court observed “… Though on the one side, there is a possibility of such hugs and kisses being manifestations of affection by an uncle, one cannot ignore the possibility of such show of 'affections' being coloured by sexual overtones. However, those are all matters for investigation.” – Held, observations made are totally unwarranted and have been made overlooking the specific allegations contained in the FIR, duly supported with the Statement of the victim-girl child u/s 164 of the Code – High Court ought not to have exercised its jurisdiction in granting protection against arrest, as the Investigating Officer deserves free-hand to take the investigation to its logical conclusion.

(Para 10, 11)

B. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012), Section 7, 8, 9, 11, 29 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 354A(1)(i),(ii) & (iv), 354 A-(2) and 354-A(3) -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- POCSO matter – Anticipatory bail –Victim-girl is traumatized to such a high degree that her academic pursuits have been adversely impacted alone, coupled with the legislative intent especially reflected through Section 29 of the POCSO Act, are sufficient to dissuade a Court from exercising its discretionary jurisdiction in granting pre-arrest bail.

(Para 12)

C. Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012), Section 7, 8, 9, 11, 29 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 354A(1)(i),(ii) & (iv), 354 A-(2) and 354-A(3) -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- POCSO matter – Anticipatory bail -- Charge-sheet filed -- It will be unfair to presume that the Investigating Officer does not require Respondent No.1 for custodial interrogation for the purpose of further investigation.

(Para 14)

D. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 164, 438 -- Anticipatory bail – Custodial interrogation -- In many anticipatory bail matters, one common argument being canvassed that no custodial interrogation is required and, therefore, anticipatory bail may be granted -- There appears to be a serious misconception of law that if no case for custodial interrogation is made out by the prosecution, then that alone would be a good ground to grant anticipatory bail -- Custodial interrogation can be one of the relevant aspects to be considered along with other grounds while deciding an application seeking anticipatory bail.

(Para 15)

E. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 164, 438 -- POCSO matter – Anticipatory bail – Prima facie case – Nature of offence -- Custodial interrogation -- There may be many cases in which the custodial interrogation of the accused may not be required, but that does not mean that the prima facie case against the accused should be ignored or overlooked and he should be granted anticipatory bail -- First and foremost thing that the court hearing an anticipatory bail application should consider is the prima facie case put up against the accused -- Thereafter, the nature of the offence should be looked into along with the severity of the punishment -- Custodial interrogation can be one of the grounds to decline anticipatory bail -- However, even if custodial interrogation is not required or necessitated, by itself, cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail.

(Para 15

F. Binding precedent – Judgment of Co-ordinate Bench of High Court --  Decision of the Kerala High Court rendered in the Joy’s case (2019) 1 KLT 935 deals with Section 29 of the POCSO Act -- When the learned Judge decided the anticipatory bail application, the decision of the coordinate Bench in the case of Joy was binding to him -- He could not have ignored a binding decision -- It is a different thing to say that if he may disagree with the view taken and accordingly refer it to a larger Bench.

(Para 16)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 498A, 120B, 323, 324 -- Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961, (28 of 1961), Section 3, 4 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – FIR in matrimonial dispute --Anticipatory bail – Condition of ad-interim compensation of Rs.10 lacs in favour of wife – Legality of – Held, no reasonable justification for the High Court to call upon the appellant to submit a demand draft of Rs.10 lakhs in availing the benefit of pre-arrest bail -- Appeal allowed and the order passed by the High Court directing the appellant to deposit a Demand Draft of Rs. 10 Lakhs is hereby set aside.

(Para 2-7)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 307, 34 -- Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959), Sections 25, 27 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 319, 438 – Attempt to murder -- Summoning u/s 319 Cr.P.C. -- Anticipatory bail – Prosecution agencies did not consider it appropriate to arraign the petitioner as an accused -- Thus, a view favouring the petitioner exists, and on this ground alone, the petitioner is entitled to bail.

(Para 1-3)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 420, 120-B – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Cheating – Anticipatory bail -- Agreement to sell could not fructify into sale deed and in subsequent negotiations, four cheques totalling a sum of Rs. 30 Lakhs were handed over to the complainant -- Cheques dishonoured, complaint u/s 138 of the NI Act filed -- Thereafter FIR u/s 420, 120B IPC – Petition for pre-arrest bail allowed.

(Para 2-5)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 15, 18 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- NDPS case – Anticipatory bail -- No phone calls exchanged between the petitioner and the main accused from whom the recovery has been effected – Petitioner has joined the investigation and is not required for further investigation -- Petition allowed, interim order ordered to be made absolute.

(Para 1-5)

Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (33 of 1989), Sections 3, 4, 14-A -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 452, 354, 323, 34 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Dismissal of anticipatory bail by Session Court – Remedy against -- Petitioner apprehending arrest has come up before High Court again u/s 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail – Held, as per Section 14-A of SCSTPOA, 1989, an appeal would lie against an order of bail – Present petition is not maintainable -- Since the petitioner has chosen the wrong provision of law, the petitioner shall be at liberty to file an appeal under section 14-A of SCSTPOA and to enable the petitioner to do so, arrest stayed for two weeks.

(Para 1-3)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 420, 506, 120-B -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Cheating -- Anticipatory bail -- Allegations against the petitioner and co-accused are that they duped the complainant for a sum of Rs. 90 Lacs – Petitioner is a lady aged just 39 years, considering the allegations and in the facts and circumstances peculiar to the petitioner, on this ground alone she is entitled to bail --  Furthermore, the petitioner is a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct -- Maximum sentence imposable for the offences mentioned in FIR does not exceed seven years -- Petition allowed.

(Para 6-9)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 406, 420 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Cheating – Criminal breach of trust -- Anticipatory bail -- Petitioner is a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct – Maximum sentence imposable for the offences mentioned in FIR does not exceed seven years -- Thus, directions passed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 apply to this petition – Possibility of the accused influencing the investigation, tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, and the likelihood of fleeing justice, can be taken care of by imposing elaborative and stringent conditions – Petition allowed, conditions imposed.

(Para 6-28)

Electricity Act, 2003 (36 of 2003), Section 136 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Theft of electricity -- Anticipatory bail -- Petitioner is a first offender, and one of the relevant factors would be to provide an opportunity to course-correct -- Maximum sentence imposable for the offences mentioned in FIR does not exceed seven years -- Thus, directions passed in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 apply to the petition -- Possibility of the accused influencing the investigation, tampering with evidence, intimidating witnesses, and the likelihood of fleeing justice, can be taken care of by imposing elaborative and stringent conditions – Petition allowed, conditions imposed.

(Para 6-27)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 18 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- NDPS case – Anticipatory bail – Recovery of 206 grams of opium from co-accused – Disclosure that he sold 250 grams of opium to petitioner – Only on the basis of the disclosure statement, the petitioner is sought to be roped in – Petitioner was earlier an accused in an offence under the IPC, but he stands acquitted in that case – Petitioner directed to appear before the SHO/Investigating Officer to join investigation and in the event of his arrest, he ordered to be released on bail.

(Para 1-5)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 380, 457 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Theft in dwelling house – Anticipatory bail -- Lock of inner door of house was broken and theft of LCD, Gas Cylinder, stove, gold ornaments, utensils and cash occurred – Only on the basis of disclosure statement by some of the apprehended persons / accused, the petitioner has been roped in – No recovery has been made from the petitioner, he is not involved in any other case – Petitioner directed to appear before the SHO/Investigating Officer to join investigation and in the event of his arrest, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing bail bonds.

(Para 1-6)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Anticipatory bail – Concealment of filing earlier bail application -- Law is well settled that where a process is “ex debito justitiae” the Court would refuse to exercise its discretion in favour of the applicant where the application is found to be wanting in bona fides. 

(Para 7, 8)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438, 446A -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 363, 366-A, 34, 120-B, 376 -- Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (32 of 2012), Section 4 – Absence from trial – Non-bailable warrants – Anticipatory bail -- Petitioner had been regularly appearing before the trial Court and it was only on one occasion he absented and even his bail bonds have not been cancelled or forfeited to the State -- Keeping in view that there is only a single date default, petitioner is directed to put in appearance before the trial Court within ten days from today and on his doing so he shall be released on bail on old bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court.

(Para 2-4)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 406, 420, 506, 120-B -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Cheating case – Anticipatory bail -- Petitioner joined the investigation for four times – There was one to one financial transactions between the parties and some material was supplied by the complainant to the petitioner -- There appears to be breach of contract between the parties -- Petitioner also issued some cheques of the disputed amount and regarding which proceedings u/s 138 of the N.I. Act are still pending – Therefore, objection that it was only for the recovery of money and for some IT equipments that his custodial interrogation is required, cannot sustain in view of the fact that it is a settled law that the police is not a recovery agent – Petition allowed.

(Para 7)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Sections 22, 29, 61, 85 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Commercial quantity -- Second regular bail application – Petitioner is in custody since 20.11.2020 – Contention that documents viz. consent/non-consent memo and recovery memo have inscription of FIR at the top of the documents, despite the fact that at that time there was no such FIR in existence -- Consent memo and non-consent memo are shown to have been signed by the petitioner whereas recovery memo is not shown to have been signed by the petitioner despite the fact that all these documents were prepared at the site – Held, on the basis of material available on record, complicity of the petitioner would remain debatable -- Without forming any opinion on the merits, keeping in view the period of custody since 20.11.2020 and material available on record, Court deemed it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail.

(Para 5-15)

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (26 of 1881), Section 138 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Cheque bounce case -- Non-bailable warrants – Bailable case – Need of anticipatory bail – Held, petitioner has been summoned for an offence u/s 138 of the N.I. Act which is a bailable offence -- Hence, there is no occasion for apprehension of arrest and detention in a bailable offence provided the petitioner is ready and willing to comply with the conditions set forth by the concerned Illaqa Magistrate for granting him the concession of bail – Petition withdrawn with liberty to move an application/petition for bail before the concerned Illaqa Magistrate.

(Para 2)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 302, 452, 34 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 190(1)(b), 438 – Murder case – Innocent in report u/s 173(2) Cr.P.C. – Summoning by Magistrate – Anticipatory bail -- On the contention that petitioners were found to be not involved in the alleged occurrence and their names were kept in Column No.2 in the final police report as submitted under Section 173(2) Cr.PC and now, they have been summoned by the concerned Illaqa Magistrate and petitioners had no role to play in the alleged crime, interim bail was given -- Petitioners have appeared before the ACJM and are not required for further custodial interrogation – Petition allowed and the interim order made absolute.

(Para 2-5)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 279, 427 -- Arms Act, 1959 (54 of 1959), Section 25 – Absentee from trial – Non-bailable warrants – Anticipatory bail – Maintainability of -- Petitioner absented before trial Court, initially bailable warrants were issued and thereafter he was summoned through non-bailable warrants – Petition dismissed as not maintainable.

(Para 1-4)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 148, 149, 307, 379-B, 506 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Unlawful assembly – Snatching matter – Anticipatory bail -- Role attributed to the petitioner is that he was a member of unlawful assembly and he barged into the shop of the injured having a cudgel (danda) and looted Rs.7,000/-from the drawer of the latter -- Recovery of the looted amount and danda is to be made from the petitioner – Petitioner has joined the investigation and is no more required for any further investigation -- Petition allowed and the interim bail granted to the petitioner made absolute.

(Para 4, 5)

A. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 406, 498-A – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438, 439(2) – Dowry case -- Cancellation of anticipatory bail -- Criminal breach of trust -- It will remain a moot and debatable point during the course of trial as to whether any articles of istridhan were entrusted to respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (husband and father-in-law), if entrusted, whether any demand for return thereof was raised and if so, as to whether they had refused to return the said articles -- Proceedings u/s 406 and 498-A IPC are not meant for recovery of the dowry articles -- It remains disputed as to whether any such articles were entrusted or not, the refusal of bail only on the score that no recovery has been effected, particularly when respondent Nos. 2 and 3 have joined the investigation cannot be termed to be justified.

(Para 6)

B. Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 406, 498-A – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438, 439(2) – Dowry case -- Cancellation of anticipatory bail -- No allegation to the effect that respondent Nos. 2 and 3 (husband and father-in-law) have misused or abused the concession of bail -- Even there is no allegation that there is any apprehension to the effect that they will in any manner flee from justice, hamper the investigation or intimidate the witnesses -- Impugned order even when tested on merits indicates that the same does not suffer from any illegality, arbitrariness or perversity which may provide justified ground for indulgence by High Court for cancellation thereof.

(Para 8)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 306 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 32(1) -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Abetment to suicide – Anticipatory bail – Dying declaration -- Holographic made dying declaration by the deceased did not name the petitioners to abet him to commit suicide -- Any subsequent statement, made by the deceased to any witness, becomes an oral dying declaration, and, its effect becomes completely subsumed besides becomes eclipsed within the realms of the scribed dying declaration -- Court does not deem it fit, and, appropriate to order for the custodial interrogation of the petitioners-bail applicants, as, thereupons their personal liberty would become unnecessarily fettered, and, curtailed -- Bail applicants-petitioners are admitted to anticipatory bail.

(Para 3, 4)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 20(b)(i)C, 61, 85, 37 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- NDPS case -- Anticipatory bail – Allegation that petitioner supplied Ganja weighing 5 kgs. 200 grams, to the principal offender – State submits that the above weight of above Ganja, makes it fall within the ambit of intermediate quantity – Rigors of Section 37 of NDPS Act are not applicable – Ad interim bail granted made absolute.

(Para 1, 3-5)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 498A -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- Matrimonial dispute – Non-recovery of dowry articles -- Anticipatory bail – Petitioner joined investigation on interim bail -- Recovery of disputed dowry articles would not come in the way of confirmation of interim bail -- If at some stage the parties agree to reconcile their differences then the fact that they had spent some time in custody would be a circumstance which may come in the way of amicably settling the matter – Interim bail granted to petitioner made absolute -- Rajesh Sharma’s case (2018) 10 SCC 472 and Anil Rajput’s case 2010(6) RCR (Criminal) 1126 relied.

(Para 1,2,6,7)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 323, 326, 34 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Anticipatory bail -- Interim bail -- Submission by ld. State counsel that the bail applicants have meted the required/enjoined co-operation(s) to the investigating officer concerned -- After completion of investigations, the IO, is very promptly instituting an affirmative report u/s 173 of the Cr.P.C. -- Not fit and proper case to order custodial interrogation of the bail applicants – Interim bail made absolute.

(Para 1-4)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 173, 248, 438, 482 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 148, 149, 323, 427, 447, 452, 506, 380 -- Anticipatory bail with a condition to deposit of Rs.1,10,000/- -- Acquittal in trial – Right to refund -- After acquittal, in a petition moved by the petitioner, High Court directed CJM for release of amount – CJM needlessly proceeded to interpret the order without any jurisdiction, and observed that filing of appeal against acquittal by complainant was not brought to the notice of High Court, therefore, the amount should not be disbursed to the applicant/accused till further clarification from the High Court – Held, CJM passed the order by giving irrational reasons, which not only show his dearth of understanding criminal jurisprudence & fundamental principles of law, but also reflect judicial indiscipline on his part, which amounts to grave misconduct and warrants departmental action against him -- Impugned order set aside -- Amount deposited by the petitioner ordered to be refunded forthwith -- Copy of the order sent to Hon'ble the Chief Justice for initiating departmental action against CJM.

(Para 2,3,9-13)

Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Sections 148, 149, 323, 395, 458, 307 (Section 325 IPC added later on) -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – Attempt to murder – Dacoity – Anticipatory bail -- Petitioner was not named in the FIR, in supplementary statement recorded after three days, the complainant stated that at the time of registration of the FIR, he was under the influence of the medicine and forgot the name of the petitioner but now he is sure about the involvement of the petitioner in the crime, but not attributed any specific role to him – Petitioner directed to join the investigation as and when called upon to do so and if he is sought to be arrested, he shall be released on anticipatory bail to the satisfaction of Investigating Officer/Arresting Officer.

(Para 4-7)