[ad_1]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
In this case Supreme court has established important guidelines for granting interim anticipatory bail. The bench comprising Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan laid down crucial principles:
Key Holdings:
-
Courts must exercise caution when granting interim protection to accused persons while deciding anticipatory bail pleas
-
Ad-interim relief that is practically equivalent to final anticipatory bail relief is impermissible during the pendency of the anticipatory bail application
-
The Court disapproved High Courts granting accused persons liberty to join investigations while simultaneously ordering their release on ad-interim bail if arrested
Three Options for High Courts:
The Supreme Court clarified that when High Courts hear anticipatory bail applications, they have three options:
-
Reject the application immediately
-
Issue notice to the State without granting interim protection
-
Issue notice and grant appropriate protection (exercising discretion based on case merits)
The Court emphasized that “such ad-interim reliefs have their own legal implications” and referenced the Srikant Upadhyay & Ors. v. State of Bihar & Anr. (2024) case, which stressed caution in exercising discretionary power to prevent obstruction of investigations and miscarriage of justice.
[ad_2]
Source link