Aishwarya Rathore-
The Supreme Court expressed its dissatisfaction with the fact that a person who was not arrested during an inquiry or when a charge sheet was being prepared, was taken into custody when he appeared on receipt of summons.
The bench of Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy observed that “It would be appropriate to lay down certain principles in this regard.”
In the recent case, the appellant accused claimed that he had cooperated with the investigation but had not been arrested.
When the charge sheet was submitted, he requested Anticipatory Bail, which the High Court denied.
When the Special Leave Petition (SLP) against the High Court order was admitted, the court questioned the accused’s counsel about why he did not appear after summons were issued in connection with the taking of cognizance.
According to the court, he should have come and applied for regular bail at that point, and there should have been no need for anticipatory bail.
In reply, the counsel pointed out that the system that is followed especially in the State of Uttar Pradesh is that even if a person is not arrested during the investigation, on charge sheet being filed, more so, in such cases of CBI a person is sent to custody and thus, his appearance and applying for bail would have resulted in his being sent to custody.?
“Prima facie, we cannot appreciate why in such a scenario is there a requirement for the petitioner being sent to custody. Be that as it may, it will be appropriate to lay down some principles on this behalf.” The bench said while issuing notice in this case.
The court also stayed the execution of a non-bailable warrant and directed not to arrest the accused.
Also read: Supreme Court registers Suo Motu case on safety of Judges post Uttam Anand Death