NEW DELHI: Settling a vexed subject that evoked totally different rulings from HCs, the Supreme Court docket on Monday adjudged that an individual, already arrested and in custody in reference to an offence, is entitled to hunt anticipatory bail if he feared that the police could arrest him in one other offence.
A bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra mentioned given the state of affairs on the bottom, the police could e-book an accused, already in custody for an offence, in one other case and arrest him instantly in that case if he’s launched on bail within the first case.
“There is no such thing as a specific or implied restriction within the prison process code or in another statute that prohibits the Court docket of Session or the Excessive Court docket from entertaining and deciding an anticipatory bail utility in relation to an offence, whereas the applicant is in custody in relation to a distinct offence,” the bench mentioned. Writing the 74-page judgment, Justice Pardiwala mentioned, “When procedural legislation does not preclude the investigating company from arresting an individual in relation to a distinct offence whereas he’s already beneath custody in some earlier offence, the accused too can’t be precluded of his statutory proper to use for anticipatory bail solely on the bottom that he’s in custody in relation to a distinct offence.”
As soon as an accused, who’s in custody, is granted anticipatory bail by the court docket in a subsequent offence, the police can not search his remand for interrogation within the second offence, the bench mentioned.
The Excessive Courts of Rajasthan, Delhi and Uttar Pradesh (Allahabad) had taken a view that an anticipatory bail utility wouldn’t be maintainable if the accused is already arrested and is in custody in reference to another offence. Nonetheless, Bombay and Orissa HCs had taken a opposite view. The pre-arrest bail provision was launched in 1973 within the prison process code.
The bench mentioned if an accused, already beneath custody for an offence, is granted pre-arrest bail in a distinct offence, then the police can not take him in custody for manufacturing earlier than the trial court docket within the second case.
The SC mentioned, “Every arrest an individual faces compounds his humiliation and ignominy… The preliminary arrest itself usually brings a wave of social stigma and private misery, as the person struggles with the implications of their authorized predicament. When a subsequent arrest happens, it intensifies this emotional and social burden, amplifying the notion of their criminality and reinforcing unfavourable judgments from society.” “Subsequent arrest in relation to totally different offences, whereas the person is in custody in a selected offence, additional alienates the person from their neighborhood and adversely impacts their private integrity. For that reason, it’s incorrect to imagine that subsequent arrests diminish the extent of humiliation. Quite the opposite, every further arrest exacerbates the individual’s disgrace making the cumulative impression of such authorized entanglements more and more devastating,” it mentioned.
A bench of Chief Justice D Y Chandrachud, and Justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra mentioned given the state of affairs on the bottom, the police could e-book an accused, already in custody for an offence, in one other case and arrest him instantly in that case if he’s launched on bail within the first case.
“There is no such thing as a specific or implied restriction within the prison process code or in another statute that prohibits the Court docket of Session or the Excessive Court docket from entertaining and deciding an anticipatory bail utility in relation to an offence, whereas the applicant is in custody in relation to a distinct offence,” the bench mentioned. Writing the 74-page judgment, Justice Pardiwala mentioned, “When procedural legislation does not preclude the investigating company from arresting an individual in relation to a distinct offence whereas he’s already beneath custody in some earlier offence, the accused too can’t be precluded of his statutory proper to use for anticipatory bail solely on the bottom that he’s in custody in relation to a distinct offence.”
As soon as an accused, who’s in custody, is granted anticipatory bail by the court docket in a subsequent offence, the police can not search his remand for interrogation within the second offence, the bench mentioned.
The Excessive Courts of Rajasthan, Delhi and Uttar Pradesh (Allahabad) had taken a view that an anticipatory bail utility wouldn’t be maintainable if the accused is already arrested and is in custody in reference to another offence. Nonetheless, Bombay and Orissa HCs had taken a opposite view. The pre-arrest bail provision was launched in 1973 within the prison process code.
The bench mentioned if an accused, already beneath custody for an offence, is granted pre-arrest bail in a distinct offence, then the police can not take him in custody for manufacturing earlier than the trial court docket within the second case.
The SC mentioned, “Every arrest an individual faces compounds his humiliation and ignominy… The preliminary arrest itself usually brings a wave of social stigma and private misery, as the person struggles with the implications of their authorized predicament. When a subsequent arrest happens, it intensifies this emotional and social burden, amplifying the notion of their criminality and reinforcing unfavourable judgments from society.” “Subsequent arrest in relation to totally different offences, whereas the person is in custody in a selected offence, additional alienates the person from their neighborhood and adversely impacts their private integrity. For that reason, it’s incorrect to imagine that subsequent arrests diminish the extent of humiliation. Quite the opposite, every further arrest exacerbates the individual’s disgrace making the cumulative impression of such authorized entanglements more and more devastating,” it mentioned.