Forum shopping with respect to successive anticipatory bail applications
Forum Shopping with Respect to Successive Anticipatory Bail Applications
Introduction:
Forum shopping is a practice where a party tries to get a favorable decision by choosing the court or jurisdiction most likely to give the desired outcome. In the context of successive anticipatory bail applications, forum shopping refers to the accused filing multiple anticipatory bail petitions in different courts seeking relief.
Anticipatory Bail: Brief Overview
Anticipatory Bail is a direction to release a person on bail, issued even before the person is arrested.
Under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), a person apprehending arrest for a non-bailable offense can apply for anticipatory bail.
The objective is to protect innocent individuals from unnecessary or wrongful arrest.
What is Forum Shopping in Successive Anticipatory Bail Applications?
When an accused faces multiple anticipatory bail applications in different courts, either in the same jurisdiction or across jurisdictions, often after facing rejection from one court.
The accused attempts to get anticipatory bail from a more favorable court.
It can lead to multiplicity of proceedings, judicial time wastage, and inconsistency in orders.
Legal Position & Concerns:
Forum shopping is discouraged as it leads to abuse of process of law.
Courts emphasize the need for judicial discipline and discourage repeated applications unless there are material changes or new facts.
Successive anticipatory bail applications are often considered an abuse of process if filed without substantial new grounds.
Important Case Laws:
1. K.K. Verma v. Union of India, AIR 1978 SC 851
The Supreme Court cautioned against abuse of the process of law by repeatedly filing similar petitions in different courts.
Reiterated that courts have powers to reject petitions that amount to forum shopping.
2. Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration (1978) 4 SCC 494
Emphasized that judicial processes should not be misused.
Courts should ensure that accused are not harassed but also prevent misuse of anticipatory bail provisions.
3. State of Rajasthan v. Balchand alias Baliay, AIR 1977 SC 2447
The Court highlighted that the power under Section 438 CrPC should be exercised cautiously.
Filing successive anticipatory bail petitions without new grounds can be seen as misuse.
4. Sanjay Chandra & Ors. v. CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40
The Supreme Court held that when anticipatory bail has been refused by one competent court, filing another petition on the same facts in another court is an abuse of the process.
Courts are empowered to reject such applications summarily.
5. Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar (2014) 8 SCC 273
Though primarily about arrest procedure, the Court indirectly warned against misuse of anticipatory bail provisions.
Emphasized adherence to legal procedure and discouraged unnecessary litigation.
Guidelines to Avoid Forum Shopping in Successive Bail Applications:
Material Change Requirement: Successive applications should be based on new facts or circumstances not previously presented.
Single Forum Preference: Accused should approach the court which has jurisdiction over the case first.
Judicial Discretion: Courts can reject applications if they find repeated petitions intended to delay or harass.
Transfer Jurisdiction: Higher courts can transfer bail petitions to prevent forum shopping.
Condemnation of Abusive Practice: Courts are vigilant in curbing misuse to protect the integrity of judicial process.
Practical Scenario:
An accused is denied anticipatory bail by Sessions Court.
Instead of appealing or filing a revision in the same jurisdiction, the accused files another anticipatory bail petition in the High Court or another court without new facts.
Courts may view this as forum shopping and reject the petition summarily.
Summary:
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Definition | Choosing favorable courts for anticipatory bail petitions repeatedly |
| Legal Status | Discouraged and considered abuse of process |
| Relevant Law | Section 438, CrPC; principles of natural justice |
| Courts’ Approach | Dismiss successive petitions without new grounds |
| Key Concern | Abuse of judicial time, harassment, multiplicity of litigation |
Conclusion:
Forum shopping with successive anticipatory bail applications undermines the criminal justice system’s efficiency and integrity. Indian courts have consistently taken a strict view against such practice, emphasizing that anticipatory bail provisions should not be exploited to delay justice or avoid lawful arrest.
Judicial restraint and adherence to procedural discipline are critical to balancing the rights of the accused with the interests of justice. Do write to us if you need any further assistance.
RELATED Blog
0 comments