Anticipatory bail remains maintainable despite abscondence-related steps; courts must still assess Section 438 factors on the facts.

Section 438 CrPC remains available even where the accused is shown as absconding or has been proceeded against under proclamation-related steps, because such steps affect the court's discretion on the merits and do not create an absolute bar to maintainability. On the facts, the court found the parties were adults with a prior relationship, noted the absence of serious criminal antecedents, and considered that the applicant's presence could be secured through conditions. Anticipatory bail was therefore granted, with the court affirming that abscondence-related proceedings do not by themselves extinguish the pre-arrest bail remedy.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether an application for anticipatory bail is maintainable when the accused is alleged to be absconding or has been subjected to proclamation, farari panchnama, or cash reward for arrest. (ii) Whether the applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail on the facts of the case involving allegations of rape on a false promise of marriage.

Issue (i): Whether an application for anticipatory bail is maintainable when the accused is alleged to be absconding or has been subjected to proclamation, farari panchnama, or cash reward for arrest.

Analysis: Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is a liberty-protective provision and does not create a statutory bar merely because the investigating agency has declared the person absconding, issued proclamation-related steps, or fixed a cash reward. The factors under Section 438, including the possibility of fleeing from justice, go to the merits of the request, not to maintainability. The Court read the later procedural steps under Sections 82 and 83 as relevant circumstances for judicial discretion, not as an absolute prohibition on invoking anticipatory bail.

Conclusion: The application for anticipatory bail was maintainable.

Issue (ii): Whether the applicant was entitled to anticipatory bail on the facts of the case involving allegations of rape on a false promise of marriage.

Analysis: The Court noted the parties' mature age, their prior intimate relationship, the marriage-related assertions, and the material suggesting proximity between them. It also considered that no serious criminal antecedents were shown and that the applicant's presence could be secured by imposing conditions. In the circumstances, the balance of factors under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 favoured protection from arrest while investigation continued.

Conclusion: Anticipatory bail was granted.

Final Conclusion: The applicant was granted pre-arrest bail with conditions, and the order affirmed that abscondence-related steps do not by themselves extinguish the remedy under Section 438.

Ratio Decidendi: Absconding-related proceedings may weigh against grant on merits, but they do not by themselves bar maintainability of an application for anticipatory bail; the Court must still assess the statutory factors under Section 438 on the facts of each case.

---