Satender Kumar Antil vs CBI - Leading Case on Bail by Supreme Court of India

 

 S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A

 RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS

Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5191/2021

(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-07-2021

in CRMABA No. 7598/2021 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At

Allahabad)

SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL Petitioner(s)

 VERSUS

CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. Respondent(s)

(IA No. 105098/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT

 IA No. 105096/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION

 IA No. 90323/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL

DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)

Date : 07-10-2021 The matter was called on for hearing today.

CORAM :

 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL

 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH

For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Akbar Siddique, AOR

 Mr. Rajneesh Chuni, Adv.

Mr. Malik Javed Ansari, Adv.

Mr. Chirag Madan, Adv.

Mr. Hardik Rupal, Adv.

Mr. Parv Garg, Adv.

Mr. Adeel Talib, Adv.

Mr. Fareed Siddiqui, Adv.

Mr. Shashank Gaurav, Adv.

For Respondent(s) Mr. S.V. Raju, Ld. ASG

Ms. Sairica Raju, Adv.

Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv.

Ms. Priyanka Das, Adv.

Mr. Udai Khanna, Adv.

 Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR

Mr.Vikram Chaudhary, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.

Mr. Pranjal Krishna, Adv.

Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR




Mr. Vikram Chaudhri, Sr. Adv.

Mr. Harshit Sethi, Adv.

Mr. Keshavam Chaudhri, Adv.

Ms. Anzu. K. Varkey, AOR

 Ms. Ria Khanna, Adv.

Mr. Kapil Dahiya, Adv.

 UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following

 O R D E R

Application for intervention is allowed.

We have been provided assistance both by

Mr. S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General

and Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned senior counsel and

there is broad unanimity in terms of the suggestions

made by learned ASG. In terms of the suggestions,

the offences have been categorized and guidelines

are sought to be laid down for grant of bail,

without fettering the discretion of the courts

concerned and keeping in mind the statutory

provisions.

We are inclined to accept the guidelines and

make them a part of the order of the Court for the

benefit of the Courts below. The guidelines are as

under :

“Categories/Types of Offences

A) Offences punishable with imprisonment of 7

years or less not falling in category B & D.

B) Offences punishable with death, imprisonment

for life, or imprisonment for more than 7 years.

C) Offences punishable under Special Acts




containing stringent provisions for bail like NDPS

(S.37), PMLA (S.45), UAPA (S.43D(5), Companies Act,

212(6), etc.

D) Economic offences not covered by Special

Acts.

REQUISITE CONDITIONS

1) Not arrested during investigation.

2) Cooperated throughout in the investigation

including appearing before Investigating Officer

whenever called.

(No need to forward such an accused along with the chargesheet

(Siddharth Vs. State of UP, 2021 SCC online SC 615)

 CATEGORY A

After filing of chargesheet/complaint taking

of cognizance

a) Ordinary summons at the 1st instance/including

permitting appearance through Lawyer.

b) If such an accused does not appear despite

service of summons, then Bailable Warrant for

physical appearance may be issued.

c) NBW on failure to failure to appear despite

issuance of Bailable Warrant.

d) NBW may be cancelled or converted into a

Bailable Warrant/Summons without insisting physical

appearance of accused, if such an application is

moved on behalf of the accused before execution of

the NBW on an undertaking of the accused to appear

physically on the next date/s of hearing.

e) Bail applications of such accused on

appearance may be decided w/o the accused being

taken in physical custody or by granting interim

bail till the bail application is decided.




CATEGORY B/D

On appearance of the accused in Court

pursuant to process issued bail application to be

decided on merits.

CATEGORY C

Same as Category B & D with the additional

condition of compliance of the provisions of Bail

uner NDPS S. 37, 45 PMLA, 212(6) Companies Act 43

d(5) of UAPA, POSCO etc.”

Needless to say that the category A deals

with both police cases and complaint cases.

The trial Courts and the High Courts will

keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines while

considering bail applications. The caveat which

has been put by learned ASG is that where the

accused have not cooperated in the investigation nor

appeared before the Investigating Officers, nor

answered summons when the Court feels that judicial

custody of the accused is necessary for the

completion of the trial, where further investigation

including a possible recovery is needed, the

aforesaid approach cannot give them benefit,

something we agree with.

We may also notice an aspect submitted by

Mr. Luthra that while issuing notice to consider

bail, the trial Court is not precluded from granting




interim bail taking into consideration the conduct

of the accused during the investigation which has

not warranted arrest. On this aspect also we would

give our imprimatur and naturally the bail

application to be ultimately considered, would be

guided by the statutory provisions.

The suggestions of learned ASG which we have

adopted have categorized a separate set of offences

as “economic Offences” not covered by the special

Acts. In this behalf, suffice to say on the

submission of Mr. Luthra that this Court in Sanjay

Chandra vs.CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40 has observed in para

39 that in determining whether to grant bail both

aspects have to be taken into account:

a) seriousness of the charge and

b) severity of punishment.

Thus, it is not as if economic offences are

completely taken out of the aforesaid guidelines

but do form a different nature of offences and thus

the seriousness of the charge has to be taken into

account but simultaneously, the severity of the

punishment imposed by the statute would also be a

factor.

We appreciate the assistance given by the

learned counsels and the positive approach adopted

by the learned ASG.

The SLP stands disposed of and the matter




need not be listed further.

A copy of this order be circulated to the

Registrars of the different High Courts to be

further circulated to the trial Courts so that the

unnecessary bail matters do not come up to this

Court.

This is the only purpose for which we have

issued these guidelines, but they are not fettered

on the powers of the Courts.

Pending applications stand disposed of.

[CHARANJEET KAUR] [POONAM VAID]

ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

भारतीय संविधान से संबंधित 100 महत्वपूर्ण प्रश्न उतर

संविधान की प्रमुख विशेषताओं का उल्लेख | Characteristics of the Constitution of India

संविधान के अनुच्छेद 19 में मूल अधिकार | Fundamental Right of Freedom in Article 19 of Constitution