<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed the Allahabad High Court's "sweeping" order which said that apprehension of death could be the valid ground for grant of anticipatory bail to an accused during the Covid-19 pandemic.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Vineet Saran and B R Gavai suspended operation of the direction, issued on May 10, saying each bail application should be decided on its merits.</p>.<p>The court, however, declined to interfere with the relief granted to an accused Prateek Jain in the matter.</p>.<p>The Uttar Pradesh government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, said the accused who was granted anticipatory bail till January 3, 2022, has 130 cases pending against him. </p>.<p>Mehta added that the High Court order was relied on in many other states in matters connected with anticipatory bail. </p>.<p>The court sought a reply from the accused Jain and stressed, if he does not appear on the next date, it may consider cancelling his bail and posted the matter for hearing in first week of July. </p>.<p>The top court also appointed senior advocate V Giri, as amicus curiae in the matter to assist it.</p>.<p>The HC's single judge, in the order, said "Extraordinary times require extraordinary remedy and desperate times require remedial remedy." It also cited the top court’s direction to decongest jails amid the pandemic. </p>.<p>"Keeping in view the inadequate medical facilities for treating the large number of persons getting infected day by day, common accused cannot be left unprotected from the threat to his life on account of his arrest by police or surrender before the court as per the normal procedure applicable to accused persons in normal times," it had said.</p>
<p>The Supreme Court on Tuesday stayed the Allahabad High Court's "sweeping" order which said that apprehension of death could be the valid ground for grant of anticipatory bail to an accused during the Covid-19 pandemic.</p>.<p>A bench of Justices Vineet Saran and B R Gavai suspended operation of the direction, issued on May 10, saying each bail application should be decided on its merits.</p>.<p>The court, however, declined to interfere with the relief granted to an accused Prateek Jain in the matter.</p>.<p>The Uttar Pradesh government, represented by Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, said the accused who was granted anticipatory bail till January 3, 2022, has 130 cases pending against him. </p>.<p>Mehta added that the High Court order was relied on in many other states in matters connected with anticipatory bail. </p>.<p>The court sought a reply from the accused Jain and stressed, if he does not appear on the next date, it may consider cancelling his bail and posted the matter for hearing in first week of July. </p>.<p>The top court also appointed senior advocate V Giri, as amicus curiae in the matter to assist it.</p>.<p>The HC's single judge, in the order, said "Extraordinary times require extraordinary remedy and desperate times require remedial remedy." It also cited the top court’s direction to decongest jails amid the pandemic. </p>.<p>"Keeping in view the inadequate medical facilities for treating the large number of persons getting infected day by day, common accused cannot be left unprotected from the threat to his life on account of his arrest by police or surrender before the court as per the normal procedure applicable to accused persons in normal times," it had said.</p>
