Judicial Review Is Not A Substitute For Examiner’s Judgment: Delhi High Court Rejects DJSE Candidate’s Plea Over Alteration of Marks Part-Payments Extend Limitation - Each Payment Revives Limitation: Delhi High Court Non-Stamping Renders A Document Inadmissible, Not Void – Defect Is Curable Once Duty Is Paid: Punjab & Haryana High Court Upholds Specific Performance MP High Court Upholds Ladli Behna Yojana Criteria; Rules Registration Deadlines and Age Limits Fall Under Executive Domain Criminal Courts Are Not Recovery Agents: Orissa High Court Grants Bail in ₹3.5 Crore Land Fraud Cases Citing Article 21 and Terminal Illness 304 Part I IPC | Sudden Fight Between Brothers Over Mud House Construction: Jharkhand High Court Converts Murder Conviction To Culpable Homicide When Rape Fails, Section 450 Cannot Stand: Orissa High Court Acquits Accused of House-Trespass After Finding Relationship Consensual Concurrent Eviction Orders Will Not Be Reopened Under Article 227: Madras High Court Section 128 Contract Act | Surety’s Liability Is Co-Extensive: Kerala High Court Upholds Recovery from Guarantors’ Salary Custodial Interrogation Not Warranted When Offences Are Not Punishable With Death or Life: Karnataka High Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Deputy Tahsildar in Land Records Case Order VIII Rules 3 & 5 CPC | Silence Is Admission: State’s Failure To Specifically Deny Hiring Amounts To Acceptance: JK HC Consumer | No Complete Deficiency In Service — Excess Rainfall Also To Blame: Supreme Court Halves Compensation In Groundnut Seed Crop Failure Case Development Cannot Override The Master Plan: Supreme Court Nullifies Cement Unit CLU In Agricultural Zone Negative Viscera Report Is Not a Passport to Acquittal: Madras High Court Confirms Life Term of Parents for Poisoning Mentally Retarded Daughter Observations Have Had a Demoralising and Chilling Effect: Allahabad High Court Judge Recuses from Bail Matter After Supreme Court’s Strong Remarks Controversial YouTube Remarks On ‘Black Magic Village’ Not A Crime: Gauhati High Court Quashes FIR Against Abhishek Kar “Failure To Specifically Deny Allegations Amounts To Admission”: J&K High Court Reiterates Law Under Order VIII CPC Section 293 Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Examination of Expert When DNA Report Is Disputed: MP High Court Medical Evidence Trumps False Alibi: Allahabad HC Upholds Conviction In Matrimonial Murder Where Strangulation Was Masked By Post-Mortem Burning Helping Young Advocates Is Not A Favour – It Is A Need For A Better Justice System: Rajasthan High Court Section 82 Cr.P.C. | Mere Non-Appearance Does Not Ipsi Facto Establish Absconding: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets Aside Order Declaring Student Abroad as Proclaimed Person

Supreme Court Reiterates Personal Liberty’s Significance: Issues Landmark Guidelines for Anticipatory Bail

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India emphasized the paramount importance of personal liberty and issued landmark guidelines regarding anticipatory bail. The judgment, delivered by Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Aravind Kumar, came on July 31, 2023, and addressed a criminal appeal arising out of a Special Leave Petition.

The appellant, Md. Asfak Alam, had sought anticipatory bail after facing allegations under various sections of the Indian Penal Code and the Dowry Prohibition Act. However, his plea was dismissed by the High Court, which further directed him to surrender before the Trial Court and seek regular bail.

Justice Bhat, in the judgment, highlighted the significance of personal liberty, stating, “The history of our Republic – and indeed, the Freedom Movement has shown how the likelihood of arbitrary arrest and indefinite detention and the lack of safeguards played an important role in rallying the people to demand Independence.”

The court further underscored that arrest should not be made routinely, and the exercise of this power must be guided by the necessity of custodial investigation or preventing the accused from tampering with evidence or influencing witnesses. The judges referred to various cases, including Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar and Another, to lay down the guidelines for granting anticipatory bail, emphasizing that such bail should be granted unless there are exceptional circumstances.

“The Court always weighs the possibility of an accused [depending on his past conduct] of influencing witnesses or otherwise tampering with evidence. It was highlighted that the respondent, who is a complainant in this case, had alleged harassment on a regular basis by the appellant and his relatives at the matrimonial home just about one and a half months after their marriage and that she had even been threatened with loss of life,” the judgment read.

The Supreme Court set aside the High Court’s rejection of anticipatory bail and directed all courts to strictly follow the guidelines laid down in the judgment. The court stated, “All the State Governments [should] instruct their police officers not to automatically arrest when a case under Section 498-A IPC is registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41 CrPC.”

The ruling has been hailed as a significant step in safeguarding personal liberty and preventing arbitrary arrests, reinforcing the principles enshrined in the Constitution of India.

Date of Decision: July 31, 2023

ASFAK ALAM  vs THE STATE OF JHARKHAND & ANR.            

Latest Legal News