If anyone is declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of CrPC, he is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail as upheld by the Hon’ble Supreme Court through the learned bench led by Justice M. R. Shah in the case of Prem Shankar Prasad v. The State of Bihar & Anr. (CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.1209 OF 2021)
The brief facts of the case are that the appellant filed an FIR against respondent No.2 for the offences punishable under sections 406, 407, 468, 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. A warrant of arrest came to be issued by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Saran, Chapra. It appears that thereafter respondent No.2 – accused is absconding and concealing himself to avoid service of warrant of arrest. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate issued a proclamation against respondent No.2 under section 82 Cr.P.C. Only thereafter, the accused filed anticipatory bail application before learned Trial Court. By a detailed order, the learned Trial Court dismissed the said anticipatory bail application and rejected the prayer for anticipatory bail on merits as well as on the ground that as the accused is absconding and even the proceedings under section 82/83 Cr.P.C have been issued, the accused is not entitled to the anticipatory bail. Thereafter the accused approached the High Court by way of present application and, ignoring the aforesaid relevant aspect, by the impugned judgment and order the High Court has allowed the said anticipatory bail by observing that in the event of his arrest/surrender within six weeks in the Court below, he may be released on bail subject to the conditions as laid down under section 438 (2) of Cr.P.C. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court granting anticipatory bail to respondent No.2 – accused, the original informant/complainant – appellant has preferred the present appeal.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court held, “The High court has committed an error in granting anticipatory bail to respondent No.2 – accused ignoring the proceedings under Section 8283 of Cr.P.C. At this stage, it is required to be noted that respondent No.2 accused has been charge sheeted for the offences punishable under sections 406 and 420, etc. and a chargesheet has been filed in the court of learned Magistrate Court. In view of the reasons stated above, the impugned judgment and order dated 14.08.2019 passed by the High Court granting anticipatory bail to respondent No.2 – accused is unsustainable and is accordingly quashed and set aside.”
Click here to read the Judgment
Judgment reviewed by Vandana Ragwani
