Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

"Anticipatory Bail Not a Right for Proclaimed Offenders," Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court's Bail Order

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India has overturned the anticipatory bail granted to Dharamraj by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana. The apex court emphasized that "Anticipatory bail is not a right for proclaimed offenders," setting a precedent for future cases involving individuals declared as proclaimed offenders.

The State of Haryana had appealed against the anticipatory bail granted to Dharamraj, who was accused under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Supreme Court found that the High Court's grant of anticipatory bail was "improper," particularly given that Dharamraj had been declared a proclaimed offender.

The bench, comprising of Justices AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH and S.V.N. BHATTI, scrutinized the High Court's reasoning and found it lacking. The apex court stated, "The High Court placed reliance on Arnesh Kumar v State of Bihar to the effect that where the offence is punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than seven years or which may extend to seven years, there is to be no automatic arrest. However, Section 364, IPC carries a term of imprisonment for life or rigorous imprisonment of ten years and fine. We are a bit perplexed as to how, despite the addition of Section 364, IPC, the High Court took the view that Arnesh Kumar would aid the respondent in his quest for pre-arrest bail."

The Supreme Court also cited various precedents, including Lavesh v State (NCT of Delhi) and State of Madhya Pradesh v Pradeep Sharma, to emphasize that a proclaimed offender is generally not entitled to anticipatory bail. "The respondent, without first successfully assailing the order declaring him as a proclaimed offender, could not have proceeded to seek anticipatory bail," the court observed.

Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order and directed Dharamraj to surrender before the concerned court within four weeks. He may then seek regular bail, which will be considered on its own merits.

Date of Decision: August 29, 2023

STATE OF HARYANA  vs DHARAMRAJ

Latest Legal News