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

Law Aides the Abiding, Not Its Resistant – Supreme Court Affirms Denial of Anticipatory Bail to Accused Declared Absconders

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court today dismissed the appeal (Criminal Appeal No. Of 2024 @ SLP(Crl.) No. 7940 of 2023) filed by Srikant Upadhyay & Ors. Against the State of Bihar & Anr., reaffirming the denial of anticipatory bail to individuals declared absconders and emphasizing the importance of respecting court orders.

Legal Point: The apex court’s decision focused on the denial of anticipatory bail to individuals against whom non-bailable warrants are issued and proceedings under Sections 82/83, Cr.PC are initiated. The bench of Justices C.T. Ravikumar and Sanjay Kumar upheld that the appellants’ failure to respect lawful court orders and their consistent attempts to evade arrest disentitle them from seeking anticipatory bail.

Case Facts: The appellants filed for anticipatory bail related to FIR No.79 of 2020, involving charges under IPC and the Daain Act. The High Court had earlier dismissed their application. The Supreme Court was confronted with the issue of whether a pending anticipatory bail application can be considered on its merits despite the issuance of a proclamation under Section 82, Cr.PC.

Court Assessment: The court meticulously analyzed the legal framework and precedents surrounding anticipatory bail, particularly for absconding accused. Justice C.T. Ravikumar, in his judgment, underscored, “An accused is deemed absconding if they are hiding or concealing themselves to avoid arrest.” The court noted that filing an anticipatory bail application does not constitute an appearance before the court for proceedings under Section 82/83, Cr.PC, stressing the necessity of physical appearance.

Furthermore, the judgment clarified that the pendency of an anticipatory bail application without interim protection does not hinder the trial court from issuing a proclamation under Section 82, Cr.PC or taking steps under Section 83, Cr.PC.

Decision: The Supreme Court concluded that the appellants’ consistent defiance of court orders and evasion of the arrest process rendered them undeserving of the relief of anticipatory bail. Thus, the appeal was dismissed, reaffirming the High Court’s decision.

Date of Decision: March 14, 2024

Srikant Upadhyay & Ors. Versus State of Bihar & Anr.

Latest Legal News