Confiscation Of Vehicle Under Section 49 Assam Forest Regulation Is Only Temporary; Final Confiscation Requires Conviction Under Section 51: Gauhati High Court Amendment Of Written Statement Cannot Be Allowed After Trial Commences If Facts Were Within Party's Knowledge: Delhi High Court Section 149 IPC Cannot Be Invoked If Number Of Convicted Persons Falls Below Five After Acquittal Of Co-Accused: Allahabad High Court Requirement Of 'Clear Seven Days' Notice For No-Confidence Motion Under West Bengal Panchayat Act Is Procedural, Not Mandatory: Calcutta High Court Cooperative Society’s General Body Cannot Ratify Appointment Made In Violation Of Statutory Rules: Punjab & Haryana High Court Registered Will Executed In Hospital Carries Presumption Of Genuineness; Illness Doesn't Equal Unsound Mind: Delhi High Court Exacting Work From Teachers Without Paying Salary Amounts To 'Begar', Violates Article 23: Bombay High Court General & Omnibus Charge Sheet Lacking Individual Roles Of Accused In Matrimonial Case Is Abuse Of Process: Calcutta High Court Admission Of Claim By IRP Not An 'Acknowledgment Of Liability' Under Section 18 Limitation Act To Extend Limitation: Supreme Court Special Appeal Against Order Refusing To Initiate Contempt Proceedings Not Maintainable If Merits Of Original Case Not Decided: Allahabad High Court Prior Sanction Not Required For Magistrate To Direct FIR Registration Under Section 156(3) CrPC; It Is A Pre-Cognizance Stage: Supreme Court Courts Cannot Create Or Expand Criminal Offences In Absence Of Legislative Action: Supreme Court Rejects Plea For Specific Hate Speech Law State Cannot Reopen Regularisation Issues That Attained Finality; ISRO Must Grant Permanent Status To Daily-Wagers: Supreme Court Plaintiffs Seeking Declaration Of Title Must Succeed On Strength Of Own Title, Not Weakness Of Defendant’s Case: Andhra Pradesh High Court Interest Of Justice Demands Child Of Tender Age Remains In Mother's Custody: Himachal Pradesh High Court Judgment Debtors Cannot Approbate And Reprobate; Must Adhere To Agreed Valuation In Compromise Decree: Supreme Court High Court Cannot Act As Appellate Court Under Article 227 Supervisory Jurisdiction: Supreme Court Restores NICE Project Land Valuation Material Omissions In Section 161 Statements Cannot Be Cured By Improvements During Trial: Supreme Court Section 498A IPC | Courts Must Guard Against Roping In All Family Members Without Specific Evidence Of Individual Roles: Supreme Court Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail To Pawan Khera In Forgery Case, Says Allegations Prima Facie Appear Politically Motivated

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