Supreme Court: Refusal Of Anticipatory Bail But Relief From Prolonged Arrest, Said Such Order Should Not Be Given

The Supreme Court on Friday said courts should not grant relief from arrest to an accused while dismissing his anticipatory bail plea. The apex court has also held that such a directive is above discretion (prerogative) and is akin to judicial leniency, which the courts do not have.

A bench of Chief Justice NV Raman, Justice Suryakant and Justice Anirudh Bose said that the discretionary power of the court to grant anticipatory bail cannot be exercised in an uninterrupted (without restriction) manner.

The Supreme Court has said in its order that the court should take into consideration the statutory scheme. Such an order should take less care of the interests of the accused. He should keep in mind the concerns of the society and the investigating agency. Such an order should be logical.

The Supreme Court held that in certain exceptional circumstances the High Court may grant protection to the accused for some time even if the investigating agency has a reasonable reason for arresting the accused.

Saying this, the top court set aside two orders passed by the Allahabad High Court, which rejected the anticipatory bail plea of ​​the accused but granted them protection from arrest for 90 days.

The Supreme Court has said that the High Court committed a grave error by providing such protection to the accused. In fact, the effect of these orders is that the accused were not found entitled to anticipatory bail, the court said. At the same time, he also got relief from his arrest for a long time. That is, during this period, the accused can move around without fear of punitive action.

The Supreme Court on Friday said that the courts should not relieve the accused from arrest while rejecting the anticipatory bail plea. The top court has also said that such a direction is above discretion and tantamount to judicial leniency, which courts do not have.

A bench of Chief Justice NV Ramana, Justice Surya Kant and Justice Aniruddha Bose observed that the discretionary power of the court to grant anticipatory bail cannot be exercised in an unhindered manner.

The Supreme Court has said in its order that the court should take into consideration the statutory scheme. Such an order should take less care of the interests of the accused. It should take into account the concerns of the society and the investigating agency. Such an order should be logical.

The Supreme Court held that in certain exceptional circumstances the High Court may grant protection to the accused for some time even if the investigating agency has a reasonable reason for arresting the accused.

Saying this, the apex court has bypassed the two orders passed by the Allahabad High Court in which the anticipatory bail pleas of the accused were rejected but they were provided with protection from arrest for 90 days.

The Supreme Court has said that the High Court committed a grave error by providing such protection to the accused. The court said that the effect of these orders is in fact that the accused were not found entitled to anticipatory bail. At the same time, he also got relief from his arrest for a long time. That is, during this period the accused can move around without fear of penal action.