Within the Incomparable Court's later judgment in Dhanraj Aswani v. Amar S. Mulchandani & Anr., Criminal Offer No. 2501 of 2024, the key issue was whether an expectant safeguard application beneath Segment 438 of the Code of Criminal Method (CrPC) is viable in the event that the denounced is as of now in legal care for a diverse case. This address has driven to dissimilar suppositions in different Tall Courts, and the Preeminent Court's judgment gives a comprehensive investigation of the legitimate scene.
Background:
The appealing party, Dhanraj Aswani, challenged the Bombay Tall Court's arrange that permitted Amar Mulchandani (Respondent No. 1), as of now in guardianship for another offense, to apply for expectant safeguard in a diverse case. The Tall Court had overruled the appellant's complaint and held that expectant safeguard can be looked for in spite of the respondent being in care for another offense.
The Court's Observations:
Justice Pardiwala, delivering the judgment, divided the verdict into several parts to address submissions from both sides and analyze the legal framework governing anticipatory bail.
One of the key questions posed was: “Whether an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC is maintainable at the instance of an accused while he is already in judicial custody in connection with his involvement in a different case?”
Submissions of the Appellant:
The appellant contended that the legal provision of anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC does not apply to an individual who has already been placed under custody, since it necessitates the individual to have a "reason to believe" they may be arrested. The appellant highlighted that someone detained cannot expect to be arrested again and cited a number of court rulings, such as Kartar Singh v. State of Punjab and Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab.
As the Court notes:
"The pre-condition to invoke Section 438 CrPC is that the accused should have a reason to believe that he 'may be arrested'. If the accused is already in custody, then he can have no reason to believe that he 'may be arrested'."
Views of Different High Courts:
The Court reviewed the diverse opinions across different High Courts on this issue. While the Rajasthan High Court in Sunil Kallani v. State of Rajasthan and the Allahabad High Court in Rajesh Kumar Sharma v. CBI took the view that anticipatory bail cannot be sought when the person is already in custody, other High Courts like Bombay and Orissa held that anticipatory bail can still be granted in such circumstances, albeit with conditions.
Conclusion
This nuanced interpretation respects the balance between an individual's personal liberty and the state's need for investigation.
This judgment sets a crucial precedent in clarifying the application of Section 438 CrPC, providing guidance to courts handling similar cases. It reinforces the importance of judicial discretion in granting anticipatory bail while recognizing the individual's right to safeguard personal liberty across multiple charges.
Click Here to: Download/View Related File
TAGS: Anticipatory bail Section 438 CrPC judicial custody anticipatory bail while in custody Supreme Court of India personal liberty.
