UDCPR | Municipal Authorities Empowered To Grant Relaxation For Recreational Open Spaces In Redevelopment Projects: Bombay High Court Appellate Court Can Enhance Compensation Under Motor Vehicles Act Even Without Cross-Appeal By Claimants: Allahabad High Court State Instrumentalities Cannot Supplement Reasons For Withholding Public Money Via Affidavits Years Later: Calcutta High Court Immoral Traffic (Prevention) Act | Victim's Status As 'Illegal Immigrant' Does Not Dilute Offence Or Shield Perpetrator: Bombay High Court Clubbing Of Criminal Trials | No Basis To Direct Consolidation If Connected Proceedings Have Already Concluded: Delhi High Court IBC ‘Clean Slate’ Principle Cannot Extinguish Pre-existing Crystallized Liability Under Labour Awards: Bombay High Court Section 406 IPC | 'Donation' Does Not Constitute 'Entrustment'; Criminal Prosecution Quashed In Absence Of Aggrieved Victim: Delhi High Court Failure To Deliver Possession Of Plot Constitutes "Continuous Wrong" Giving Rise To Recurrent Cause Of Action Under Consumer Protection Act: Delhi State Commission High Court Cannot Entertain Writ Petition Under Article 226 When Statutory Appellate Remedy Under Section 107 CGST Act Is Available: Gujarat High Court Appointment Of Temple Servants Is The Exclusive Prerogative Of The Hereditary Trustee: Kerala High Court Stay Of Suit Proceedings Under CPC Does Not Automatically Bar Adjudication Of Pending Temporary Injunction Application: Rajasthan High Court Section 136A MV Act | Supreme Court Directs States To Impound Vehicles With Unpaid E-Challans And Mandates Electronic Enforcement Compliance Section 115 CPC | Executing Court Cannot Dismiss Execution Petition On Hyper-Technical Grounds Regarding LRs Of Judgment Debtor: Himachal Pradesh High Court Succession Act | Will Not Validly Executed If Attesting Witness Admits Signing Without Witnessing Testator’s Signature: Madras High Court High Court Cannot Interfere Under Article 227 To Correct Errors Of Fact Or Act As An Appellate Court: Madhya Pradesh High Court Advocates Act 1961 | Bar Council Has No Power To Suspend Advocate Pending Disciplinary Enquiry: Allahabad High Court Identification Of Accused By Police Personnel In Pitch Darkness Without Prior Acquaintance Is Unreliable: Himachal Pradesh High Court Body Shaming Or Insulting Physical Appearance Does Not Per Se Constitute Offence Under Section 509 IPC: Karnataka High Court Drishyam 3 | Interim Injunction To Restrain Film Release Cannot Be Granted Without Establishing Clear Subsisting Legal Right: Madras High Court Town Planning Scheme | Statutory Notice To Occupiers Under Rule 12(2)(a) Punjab Municipal Rules Is Mandatory And Independent Of Notice To Owner: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Supreme Court Sets Aside High Court’s Denial of Anticipatory Bail, Upholds Right to Liberty in Criminal Proceedings”

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment delivered today, the Supreme Court of India, comprising Justices B.V. Nagarathna and Augustine George Masih, overturned the Patna High Court’s decision denying anticipatory bail to Nandu Prasad in connection with FIR No.817/2016. The apex court, asserting the right to liberty and fair procedure, granted the appellant anticipatory bail, emphasizing that “the appellant is entitled to the relief claimed under Section 438 of the Code.”

Legal Point of the Judgment: The central legal issue revolved around the entitlement of the appellant, Nandu Prasad, to anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. This provision enables a person to seek bail in anticipation of an arrest on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offense.

Facts and Issues: The case stemmed from FIR No.817/2016, where Nandu Prasad and others were accused of offenses under various sections of the Indian Penal Code, including fraud and criminal conspiracy. After the initial application for anticipatory bail was withdrawn, a second application was dismissed by the High Court, citing the precedent set in G.R. Ananda Babu v. State of Tamil Nadu.

Court’s Assessment: The Supreme Court meticulously examined the circumstances on record, diverging from the High Court’s interpretation. The Court noted that despite the serious nature of the allegations, the right to liberty and the principles governing the grant of anticipatory bail warranted a different outcome. Justice B.V. Nagarathna observed, “Considering the circumstances on record, in our view, the appellant is entitled to the relief claimed under Section 438 of the Code.”

Decision: The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the High Court’s order. It directed that in the event of arrest, Nandu Prasad shall be released on bail, subject to furnishing a cash security of Rs. 25,000 with two like sureties. The Court also imposed conditions to ensure that the appellant does not misuse the liberty, influence witnesses, or tamper with evidence.

Date of Decision: February 20, 2024

Nandu Prasad Vs. The State of Bihar

Latest Legal News