TMI Blog2021 (5) TMI 1003X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r doing so, which would be assailable before a superior Court. To do so without giving reasons, would be contrary to the pronouncement of this Court in SUSHILA AGGARWAL AND OTHERS VERSUS STATE (NCT OF DELHI) AND ANOTHER [ 2020 (1) TMI 1193 - SUPREME COURT] . If the High Court had therefore decided to allow the anticipatory bail application of the Respondents-Accused herein, albeit for a limited period of 90 days, the task before this Court would have been somewhat easier. It is no longer res integra that any interpretation of the provisions of Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure has to take into consideration the fact that the grant or rejection of an application Under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure has a direct bearing on the fundamental right to life and liberty of an individual. The genesis of this jurisdiction lies in Article 21 of the Constitution, as an effective medium to protect the life and liberty of an individual. The provision therefore needs to be read liberally, and considering its beneficial nature, the Courts must not read in limitations or restrictions that the legislature have not explicitly provided for. Any ambiguity in the language must be reso ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dents-Accused, granted them 90 days to surrender before the Trial Court to seek regular bail and granted them protection from coercive action for the said period. Aggrieved by the grant of such relief, the complainants in both the matters are currently in appeal before us. 4 . As only a question of law is being raised, it is not necessary for this Court to advert to the facts of both the matters extensively. It is sufficient to point out that in the first case, pertaining to Nathu Singh, the Appellant's daughter was married to Respondent No. 2 in that case on 14.02.2014. As she died under suspicious circumstances in her matrimonial home on 02.01.2021, the complainant registered FIR No. 07/2021 at police station Masuri, Ghaziabad Under Sections 304B and 498A, Indian Penal Code read with Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act against the Respondents Nos. 2 to 5. 5. In the second case, the allegations are that the Appellant's brother and the latter's two sons were attacked by the Respondents in that case, due to a dispute between the parties relating to encroachment of land. The two sons were attacked on their vital parts, with one of them suffering a skull fr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the application filed by an Accused. Rather, the proviso to Section 438(1), Code of Criminal Procedure specifically provides for the arrest of the Accused on a rejection of the relief sought in their application. The impugned orders, wherein the High Court granted protection to the Respondents subsequent to the dismissal of their application, was therefore passed in excess of the High Court's jurisdiction Under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure. The learned State counsel further submitted that the High Court's orders have hampered the ongoing investigation as the police have been denied custodial interrogation of the Accused, notwithstanding the fact that the nature of offences in both cases is grave and heinous. 10. On the contrary, learned Counsel for the Respondents-Accused justified the discretion exercised by the High Court and submitted that the High Court has the power to pass such orders, in the interest of justice. 11. The sole question to be answered by the Court in the present appeals relates to whether the High Court, while dismissing the anticipatory bail applications of the Respondents, could have granted them protection from arrest. 12. The con ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... icipatory bail application of the Respondents-Accused herein, albeit for a limited period of 90 days, the task before this Court would have been somewhat easier. We would only have had to assess the reasons assigned by the Court, if any, for the imposition of such special condition in terms of the judgment in Sushila Aggarwal (supra). 16. However, in the present appeals, the High Court, after considering the facts and circumstances of the case, particularly the gravity and severity of the accusations against the Respondents, rejected the application of the Respondents-Accused. It is after rejecting the application that the High Court chose fit to grant some relief to the Respondents while directing them to surrender before the Trial Court to file a regular bail application within 90 days, by protecting them from any coercive action during that period. The Appellants-complainants are aggrieved by the same and are challenging the power of the Court to pass such a protective order after the dismissal of the anticipatory bail application. 17. To determine whether the Court can pass such orders, it is necessary to first analyze the relevant provision, viz., Section 438, Code of Cr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed is found in the proviso to Section 438(1), Code of Criminal Procedure, which specifically provides that once an application is rejected, or the Court seized with the matter refuses to issue an interim order, it is open to the police to arrest the applicant. It is this proviso that the present Appellants have relied upon to argue that the High Court, once it rejected the anticipatory bail applications of the Respondents-Accused, did not have the power to grant any further relief. 20. At first blush, while this submission appears to be attractive, we are of the opinion that such an analysis of the provision is incomplete. It is no longer res integra that any interpretation of the provisions of Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure has to take into consideration the fact that the grant or rejection of an application Under Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure has a direct bearing on the fundamental right to life and liberty of an individual. The genesis of this jurisdiction lies in Article 21 of the Constitution, as an effective medium to protect the life and liberty of an individual. The provision therefore needs to be read liberally, and considering its beneficial nature, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tself allows for such a power, as it is not necessary to undertake such an exercise in the present case, it is clear that when it comes to the High Court, such a power does exist. Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure explicitly recognizes the High Court's inherent power to pass orders to secure the ends of justice. This provision reflects the reality that no law or Rule can possibly account for the complexities of life, and the infinite range of circumstances that may arise in the future. 24. We cannot be oblivious to the circumstances that Courts are faced with day in and day out, while dealing with anticipatory bail applications. 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. For example, the applicant may plead protection for some time as he/she is the primary caregiver or breadwinner of his/her family members, and needs to make arrangements for them. In such extraordinary circumstances, when a strict case for grant of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
