The Supreme Court of India.
Credit: PTI File Photo
New Delhi: The Supreme Court has said there can't be a direction by the High Court, while granting anticipatory bail to accused, to arrest and put him behind the bars on filing of a charge sheet.
A bench of Justices Ahsanuddin Amanullah and Prashant Kumar Mishra set aside such a condition imposed by the Patna High Court in its order of August 31, 2024 while granting anticipatory bail to accused Ritesh Kumar.
"If charge sheet is submitted against the petitioner connecting him with the offence in that event the present anticipatory bail order shall lose its effect and the trial court shall take all coercive steps to ensure that petitioner is behind the bars,” the High Court had said.
Such a condition of the petitioner being taken into custody upon submission of charge sheet was not proper, the counsel for the petitioner submitted.
The bench felt the counsel for the petitioner is correct that there could not have been a specific direction that upon submission of charge sheet, the court should take all coercive steps to ensure that the petitioner is behind the bars.
"We are of the firm opinion that whenever a court considers an application for anticipatory bail/bail, it is a composite order and one portion cannot be segregated from the other. Thus, if a court gives indulgence in one part, it is only in the background of what follows and how the court balances the equities," the bench said.
The bench also said, the court after giving indulgence of granting anticipatory bail because at that point of time nothing serious had come against the petitioner; should then have left it open for the trial court to take a call on submission of charge sheet.
The court modified the direction given in the High Court's order, stating that it should read that since the charge sheet has now been submitted against the petitioner, he is required to appear before the court and the question of bail would be considered in accordance with law based on the materials before the court without being prejudiced by the High Court's order.
The court extended the interim protection granted previously to the petitioner. It also directed him to appear before the trial court within three weeks.