‘Denial of anticipatory bail cannot go with protection from arrest’

HCs must balance concerns of agency: SC

The Supreme Court has held that the denial of anticipatory bail in exercise of powers under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) can’t be accompanied with protection from arrest of the accused for long duration without assigning reasons for the same.

While rejecting the plea for anticipatory bail and yet protecting an accused from arrest for a certain period of time, the top court said that high courts must balance the concerns of the investigating agency, the complainant in the criminal case, and the society at large with the concerns of the accused.

Holding that such an “exceptional discretionary protection” from arrest should be for the shortest duration that is reasonably required, the top court said that the protection order must indicate reasons which would be assailable before the apex court.

The question of law is rooted in two identical orders of Allahabad high court wherein the high

WHILE REJECTING the plea for anticipatory bail and yet protecting an accused from arrest for a certain period of time, the Supreme Court said that high courts must balance the concerns of the investigating agency, the complainant in the criminal case, and the society at large with the concerns of the accused

court while rejecting plea for anticipatorily bail granted protection from arrest to the accused for 90 days.

Having referred to the constitutional provision and the statutory backing for the high court to exercise its inherent power to give relief even where the investigating agency has made a case for custodial interrogation, the court said, “Even when the court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to an accused, there may be circumstances where the high court is of the opinion that it is necessary to protect the person apprehending arrest for some time, due to exceptional circumstances, until they surrender before the trial court.”