Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Bail Due to Violation of Notice Requirements U/S 41 Cr.P.C.

In a recent judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court granted regular bail to a petitioner due to the violation of notice requirements under Section 41-A of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C). The judgment, delivered by Justice Raj Mohan Singh, emphasized the importance of complying with the provisions of Sections 41 and 41-A of the Cr.P.C and the directions laid down by the Supreme Court in the cases of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar and Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation.

The petitioner, represented by advocate Mr. Abhinav Gupta, had sought regular bail in a case registered under various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) at Police Station Daba, District Ludhiana. The allegations involved the petitioner’s alleged involvement in forging signatures and stamps of a Member of Legislative Assembly (MLA) on sale deeds.

The court, while referring to the principles established in Arnesh Kumar and Satender Kumar cases, noted that no notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C was issued to the petitioner, which is mandatory in cases where offenses are punishable for seven years or less. The court highlighted that the investigating agency has a duty to comply with the statutory mandates and failure to issue the required notice constitutes a violation of the accused’s rights.

Justice Raj Mohan Singh stated, “In view of Satender Kumar’s case (supra), the investigating agency is duty bound to comply with the mandate of Sections 41 and 41-A Cr.P.C. The directions issued by the Hon’ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar’s case (supra) are to be mandatorily complied with... Evidently, no notice has been issued to the petitioner, therefore... I deem it appropriate to grant regular bail to the petitioner.”

The court clarified that the grant of bail does not express any opinion on the merits of the case but is solely based on the non-compliance with the notice requirements.

This judgment serves as a reminder of the importance of following the prescribed legal procedures and statutory mandates to ensure the protection of the accused’s rights. It highlights the duty of the investigating agencies to comply with the notice provisions and the consequences of their failure to do so.

The judgment refers to the landmark cases of Arnesh Kumar vs. State of Bihar, 2014 (8) SCC 273 and Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation, (2021) 10 SCC 773, which have laid down the guidelines for issuing notices to the accused in criminal cases.

Date of Decision: 02.06.2023

Ram Baksh @ Ramu vs State of Punjab