Home Case Index All Cases Indian Laws Indian Laws + HC Indian Laws - 2020 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (5) TMI 735 - HC - Indian LawsGrant of Anticipatory Bail - it is alleged that the applicant had made a tweet on website Twitter.com which was allegedly defamatory towards the Chief Minister of Uttar Pradesh - HELD THAT:- The concept of anticipatory bail was introduced in Cr.P.C. by 1973 amendment. The said provision can be invoked by a person who has a "reasonable apprehension" that he may be arrested for committing a non-bailable offence. The main purpose for incorporating Section 438 in Cr.P.C. was that the liberty of an individual should not be unnecessarily jeopardised. Right to life and personal liberty are one of the important fundamental rights guaranteed by the constitution and therefore, no person should be confined or detained in any manner unless he has been held guilty. From the collection and scheme of Chapter XXXIII and Section 438 Cr.P.C., it becomes explicitly clear that the legislature intended to bring anticipatory bail within the category of bail and not to treat it as something different from bail - The 'bail' means as per Wharton's Law Lexicon, to "set at liberty a person arrested on security being taken for his appearance'. In Nagendra v. King Emperor [1923 (10) TMI 1 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT], it is held that the object of the bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the time of the trial and that the proper test to be applied for the solution of the question whether bail should be granted or not is whether it is probable that the party will appear to take his trial. Thus, it is clear that the object of the bail is to secure the attendance of the accused at the trial. The accused person who enjoys freedom is in a much better position to look after his case and to properly defend himself in, the trial than if he is in custody. In other words, as the Apex court holds, a presumed innocent person must have his freedom in the form of bail to enable him to establish his innocence at the trial - In Savitri Agarwal and Ors. vs. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [2009 (7) TMI 1383 - SUPREME COURT], the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that while exercising the power under sub-section 1 of Section 438 Cr.P.C., the Court must be satisfied that the applicant invoking the provision has reasons to believe that he is likely to be arrested for committing non-bailable offence and such believe must be founded for reasonable grounds. The applicant has stated on the affidavit that there are very reasonable and sufficient apprehension of being arrested for non-bailable offence. In the affidavit accompanying accompanying the bail application, it has been contended that the apprehension of the applicant is further fortified by the conduct of Uttar Pradesh Police, which has already sent two notices under Section 41(A) of Cr.P.C. - there are merit in the argument advanced by learned Additional Advocate General. The instant anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is allowed.
|