SC Rules Against Anticipatory Bail for Accused with Pending NBW and Proclamations under S. 82 CrPC.

Supreme Court Rules Against Anticipatory Bail for Accused with Pending Non-Bailable Warrants and Proclamations under Section 82 CrPC

Case Title: SRIKANT UPADHYAY VS. THE STATE OF BIHAR

The Supreme Court ruled that an accused cannot claim anticipatory bail if there are pending non-bailable warrants and a proclamation under Section 82(1) of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) against them. The Court clarified that when an accused is evading arrest despite such warrants and proclamations, they forfeit the right to seek anticipatory bail.

The decision stemmed from a criminal appeal where the accused sought pre-arrest bail after the High Court denied it due to pending warrants and a proclamation issued against them for disobeying trial court orders.

The appellant argued that their anticipatory bail application should have been considered independently of the pending warrants and proclamation. However, the Supreme Court disagreed, citing precedent cases where anticipatory bail was denied to absconding accused individuals.

The Court emphasized that merely filing an anticipatory bail application through legal representation does not constitute appearance before the court for someone facing proclamation proceedings. It also held that the pendency of an anticipatory bail application does not prevent the trial court from proceeding with issuing proclamations.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, stating that the accused's conduct of evading arrest and failing to challenge the proclamation rendered them ineligible for anticipatory bail. Therefore, the plea for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

#SupremeCourt #PreArrestBail #NonBailableWarrant #Section82CrPC #Proclamation #LegalProceedings #AnticipatoryBail #CriminalJustice #JudicialRuling #LegalInsights #CourtDecision #CriminalLaw #LegalPrecedent #AbscondingAccused #LegalRights #TrialCourt #ProclaimedOffender #CaseLaw