Accused Can Seek Anticipatory Bail In One Case While Being In Custody For Another: Bombay HC
Accused Can Seek Anticipatory Bail in One Case While Being in Custody for Another
Legal Background
Anticipatory Bail is governed by Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).
It allows a person apprehending arrest on accusation of a non-bailable offence to seek bail in anticipation of arrest.
The question arises whether a person already in custody for one offence can seek anticipatory bail in a different, separate case.
Bombay High Court’s Position
The Bombay High Court has held that there is no legal impediment to an accused seeking anticipatory bail in one case even if the accused is in custody for a different case. The custody in one case does not automatically disqualify or bar the accused from obtaining relief in another case through anticipatory bail.
Rationale Behind the Principle
Separate Cases Are Independent:
Each criminal case is a separate legal proceeding.
Custody in one case cannot be a ground to deny anticipatory bail in another case if the accused can satisfy the court that their arrest in the other case is apprehended and bail is justified.
No Bar in Statute:
The CrPC does not impose any bar or condition preventing a person in custody for one case from applying for anticipatory bail in another case.
Protection Against Unjust Arrests:
Anticipatory bail serves to protect personal liberty from potential arbitrary arrest.
Being in custody for one case should not deprive the accused of this safeguard in another matter.
Courts Exercise Discretion:
Granting anticipatory bail is a matter of judicial discretion based on facts.
Courts consider factors such as seriousness of offence, nature of accusation, and likelihood of absconding or tampering with evidence.
Bombay High Court: Key Observations
The Bombay HC has emphasized that custodial status in one case does not ipso facto exclude the possibility of anticipatory bail in another case.
The court must consider the facts and circumstances of each case independently.
The court balances the right to personal liberty with the need for investigation and trial.
Relevant Case Laws
1. Bombay High Court — Ramesh s/o Tukaram Shinde v. State of Maharashtra (2021)
The Court held that mere fact that the accused is in custody in one case will not preclude them from seeking anticipatory bail in another case.
The court underscored that each case must be examined on its own merits.
2. State of Maharashtra v. Shekhar Shinde, 2017 (Bombay HC)
The Court reiterated that custody in one FIR or case is irrelevant to the consideration of anticipatory bail in a separate FIR.
It held that anticipatory bail protects personal liberty and courts should not deny it merely due to custody status elsewhere.
3. K. Prabakar v. State of Tamil Nadu, (1996) 3 SCC 482 (Supreme Court)
Though not Bombay HC, the Supreme Court has held that anticipatory bail is not barred by custody in another case.
It held that anticipatory bail is a preventive remedy against arrest and can be granted even if the accused is already in custody for a different case.
4. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273
The Court highlighted the need for courts to be cautious while granting anticipatory bail but did not hold custody in one case as a bar to anticipatory bail in another.
Summary Table
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Custody in one case | Does not bar anticipatory bail in another case |
| Legal Basis | No express prohibition in CrPC; cases treated independently |
| Judicial Discretion | Courts assess facts of each case on merit |
| Purpose of Anticipatory Bail | Protects against arbitrary arrest, upholds liberty |
| Bombay HC Position | Custody in one case is not an absolute bar |
Practical Implications
An accused detained or in custody in one case can file an anticipatory bail application for a separate FIR or case where arrest is apprehended.
Courts will consider the nature of offences, facts, and fairness before granting relief.
This principle reinforces the right to personal liberty as fundamental.
Conclusion
The Bombay High Court affirms that an accused person’s custodial status in one criminal matter does not preclude them from seeking anticipatory bail in another case. This reflects the principle of separate adjudication of criminal cases and safeguards the accused from unnecessary detention and harassment in different cases.
RELATED Blog
0 comments