Skip to main content

Anticipatory Bail - Denial of Protection u/s. 438 Cr.P.C. by High Court - Bail granted by Apex Court

Anticipatory Bail - Denial of protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by the High Court. - Investigation is in progress and the same is yet to be completed - bail granted - Accused shall cooperate with the investigation.
JT 2018 (3) SC 262 : 2018 (3) Scale 262
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
[KURIAN JOSEPH] AND [MOHAN M. SHANTANAGOUDAR] JJ.
JANUARY 30, 2018

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.194/2018
(ARISING FROM SLP (Crl) NO.26 OF 2018)

BHAUSAHEB APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA RESPONDENT(S)

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Amol B. Karande, AOR Mr. Vijay Kumar,Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Nishant Ramakantrao Katneshwarkar, AOR Mr. Arpit Rai,Adv.

J U D G M E N T

KURIAN, J.

Leave granted. 

2. The appellant approached this Court aggrieved by the denial of protection under Section 438 Cr.P.C. by the High Court. 

3. While issuing notice by order dated 12.01.2018 this Court noted that the appellant had already taken voluntary retirement in the year 2011 and the suicide is of the year 2017. We had requested the learned counsel for the State to get instruction as to the stage of the investigation. Learned counsel for the State submits that the investigation is in progress and the same is yet to be completed. 

4. Having gone through the materials made available to the Court and having heard the learned counsel for the parties, we are of the view that it is a case where the appellant needs to be given protection on the condition that he would cooperate with the investigation. 

5. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of as follows: 

In case the appellant is arrested in connection with FIR No. 115/2017 registered at P.S. Rahata, he shall be released on bail on his executing bond to the tune of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty-five Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount. However, this is subject to the conditions under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. and the appellant shall cooperate with the investigation. 

6. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of.

Comments

  1. Excellent..!!! Amol Karande Sir we are really proud of you..!!! Keep it up..!!!

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Presumptions are the Bats of the Law, Flitting in the Twilight, but Disappearing in the Sunshine of Actual Facts [ORDER]

Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 -  Section 138 -  failure on the part of the complainant to produce his account statement and absence of entry in accounts maintained by him regarding loan advanced to the accused, does show that there was no material to support the basic facts on which the entire case of the complainant was based. Sufficient material was available on record    whereby the defence of the accused became probable. In such a situation, the presumption under the provisions of the Act ceased to operate and the burden fell upon the complainant to prove his case, which he failed to do by placing on record cogent evidence.

500+ Supreme Court of India Judgments on Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 with Head Notes & Citations

1. Mallamma (dead) By Lrs. Vs. National Insurance Co. Ltd. [07-04-2014] 

Anticipatory Bail in Attempt to Murder Cases (Section 307 IPC) : What is Important to Note [Case Law]

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 -  Section 438 -   Grant of Anticipatory Bail -  While considering the application under Section 438, the Court has to see the nature and gravity of the accusation and the antecedents of the applicant which includes whether he has been previously undergone imprisonment on conviction in respect of any cognizable offence, the possibility of the applicant fleeing from justice and whether the accusation has been made with an object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested. [Para 12]