TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (11) TMI 965
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gh Court of Judicature at Bombay Under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("CrPC"), the Appellant sought three substantive reliefs: (i) A writ of Habeas Corpus, claiming that he had been illegally arrested and wrongfully detained by the Station House Officer ("SHO") at Alibaug Police Station in the district of Raigad in Maharashtra in relation to a First Information Report^1 ("FIR") registered on 5 May 2018 Under Sections 306 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC") in spite of an earlier closure report which was accepted by the Magistrate; (ii) The quashing of the above-mentioned FIR; and (iii) The quashing of the arrest memo on the basis of which the Appellant had been arrested. These three reliefs^2 are reflected in prayers (a), (b) and (c) of the petition before the High Court. 2. Pending the disposal of the petition, by an interim application in the proceedings^3, the Appellant sought his release from custody and a stay of all further proceedings including the investigation in pursuance of the FIR. 3. A Division Bench of the High Court, by its order dated 9 November ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ife, residing at 901, Rishabh Tower, Senapati Bapat Marg, Elphistone West, Mumbai -25 personally remain present and state in writing that my mobile No. 8169947073, I am residing at the abovementioned address with my deceased Anvay Madhukar Naik, daughter Adnya Naik together. My husband is having company owned under name and dstype as Concorde Design and we were having our livelihood by doing business of architecture interior designing and engineering consultancy. My husband Anvay Madhukar Naik is having his native place at Village Kavir, Tai. Alibaug and at the said place my mother in law Kumud Madhukar Naik is residing. therefore my husband used to visit in between to my mother in law at Village Kavir Tai. Alibag. As also my husband used to bring my mother in law Kumud Naik in between with us at Mumbai. My husband for last two years was having pressure as he did not received the money of work carried out by him and he continuously used to inform me and therefore I also called in the office of Arnab Goswami and asked his accountant for payment of money of work done by us. As also contacted to other businessman also and informed that my husband is in great difficulty and as the mone....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s for Bombay Dyeing Studio project, 9) Feroz Shaikh Icast X/Skimedia not paid our 400 lacs in Laxmi, 3rd and 4th floor idea Square project in Andheri 10) Mr. Nitesh Sarda owner of smart works Magarpatta and Baner Project (55 Lacs pending) 11) kindly collect money from them and held them responsible for our death and pay to creditors 12) I and my mother are directors in Concorde India company and following persons have till now not paid me money of work done by me. In which it is written as Arnab Goswami ARV Outlife of Republic TV having Rs. 83 Lac of work done, 2) Firoz Khan having 4 crores of work done, 3) Nitesh Sarda 55 lacs of work done should be deposited and should be held responsible for my death and getting the same deposited and pay the dues of public. With regard to the contents written in the said note my husband Anvay Madhukar Naik had continuously informed me for last one or two years. While he used to tell me he was under immense pressure. Therefore I am having lawful complaint against. Arnab Goswami, 2. Firoz Khan, 3. Nilesh Sarda the persons whose names written in said suicide note by my husband Anvay Madhukar Naik that the abovementioned amount was due from them an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....but it is undetected, in that there is no clue about the culprits or the property, or where the Accused is known but there is no evidence to justify their being sent up to the Magistrate for trial. Para 219 (3) of the Bombay Police Manual reads thus: RULE 219 (3) OF BOMBAY POLICE MANUAL (3) The final report should be written up carefully by the officers incharge of the Police Station personally and should be accompanied by all the case papers numbered and indexed methodically. If the Accused has been released on bail, the Magistrate should be requested to cancel the bail bond. He should also be requested to pass orders regarding the disposal of property attached, unless any of the articles, e.g., blood stained clothes, are required for further use in true but undetected cases. A request should also be made to the Magistrate to classify the case and to issue an appropriate summary of his order, viz.: "A" True. undetected (where there is no clue whatsoever about the culprits or property or where the Accused in known but there is no evidence to justify his being sent up to the Magistrate (for trial). "B" Maliciously false. "C" Neither true ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....complaints against the Appellant in the States of Maharashtra, Chhattisgarh, Rajasthan, Madhya Pradesh, Telangana and Jharkhand as well as in the Union Territories of Jammu and Kashmir. The content of the FIRs was similar, almost identical. In the State of Maharashtra, an FIR was lodged at Police Station Sadar, District Nagpur City, details of which were as follows: Maharashtra FIR No. 238 of 2020, dated 22 April 2020, registered at Police Station Sadar, District Nagpur City, Maharashtra, Under Sections 153, 153-A, 153-B, 295-A, 298, 500, 504(2), 506, 120-B and 117 of the Indian Penal Code 1860. Apart from the above FIR, fourteen other FIRs and complaints were lodged against the Appellant in relation to his broadcasts. 14. The Appellant moved this Court in proceedings Under Article 32 of the Constitution^4 challenging the registration of these FIRs. By an interim order dated 24 April 2020, the FIR which had been lodged at Police Station Sadar, District Nagpur City was transferred to NM Joshi Marg Police Station, Mumbai and was renumbered as FIR 164 of 2020. Another FIR, FIR 137 of 2020, was registered against the Appellant on 2 May 2020 at the Pydhonie Polic....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s issued to the Appellant for breach of privilege of the legislative assembly, which is the subject of proceedings instituted in this Court; (v) A notice to show cause was issued Under Section 108(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure to the Appellant by the Special Executive Magistrate, in spite of the order of the Bombay High Court; (vi) The registration of FIR 843 of 2020 on 6 October 2020 at Kandivali Police Station (later transferred to the Crime Intelligence Unit, Mumbai) on a complaint by an employee of Hansa Research Group Private Limited in relation to the TRP scam'; (vii) A press conference by the Commissioner of Police Mumbai on 8 October 2020 mentioning the name of the Appellant as being allegedly involved in the TRP scam'; (viii) The Appellant instituted a Writ Petition Under Article 32 of the Constitution^6 before this Court seeking reliefs in respect of FIR 843 of 2020. By an order dated 15 October 2020, the Writ Petition was dismissed as withdrawn with liberty to the Appellant to approach the Bombay High Court; and (ix) The Appellant filed Writ Petition (Crl.) Stamp No. 3143 of 2020 before the Bombay High Court, in....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate has challenged the order of the CJM declining police custody in a revision before the Additional Sessions Judge, Raigad. 22. The writ petition filed by the Appellant before the Bombay High Court was heard on 5, 6 and 7 November 2020. On 7 November 2020, the High Court reserved orders and granted liberty to the Appellant to file an application for regular bail Under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a direction that it should be heard expeditiously within four days of the date of filing. Following the above direction, the Appellant moved the Sessions Court, Raigad for bail Under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. By its impugned judgment and order dated 9 November 2020, the High Court posted the hearing of the petition filed by the Appellant in regard to the prayer of quashing of the FIR on 10 December 2020. While doing so, the High Court denied bail to the Appellant on the ground that no case has been made out for the exercise of the extra-ordinary jurisdiction and that the Appellant had an alternate and efficacious remedy Under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. E Submissions of counsel 23. Assailing the order of the High Court....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on filed by the State against the order of the CJM should be heard first and it is only thereafter that the application for bail should be taken up. On the basis of the above submissions, it has been urged that the Appellant has been made a target of the vendetta of the State government, which emerges from the successive events adverted to above which have taken place since April 2020. Hence, it has been urged that there is absolutely no ground to continue the arrest of the Appellant and absent any reasonable basis for depriving him of his liberty, an order for the grant of bail should have been passed by the High Court. Mr. Salve finally submitted that the interest in preserving the procedural hierarchy of courts must give way to the need to protect the Appellant's personal liberty given the well settled legal position that the default Rule is 'bail, not jail'. 25. Opposing the above submissions, Mr. Amit Desai, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the second Respondent submits that: (i) The High Court has advisably not enquired into whether: i. The investigation is tainted by mala fides; and ii. The contents of the FIR as they st....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....earing of the proceedings before the Bombay High Court, the Division Bench indicated that if the Appellant were to file an application Under Section 439, appropriate administrative directions of the Chief Justice could be obtained for listing it before the Division Bench since applications for bail are placed for hearing before a Single Judge (while the petition was before a Division Bench) and the Appellant had only filed an interim application in the pending Writ Petition for being released on bail; (ix) Both the issue of whether the Appellant has made out a case for quashing the FIR and whether a reinvestigation could have been ordered at the Home Department of the State would be considered by the High Court on 10 December 2020; (x) The High Court has drawn a balance between the rights of the Accused and the family of the deceased victim. A substantive Writ Petition has been filed by the informant, stating that it was only through a tweet on the social media that she had learned of the 'A' summary and that she had not been heard before the order was passed by the Magistrate accepting the police report; (xi) Even when 'A Summary has been acc....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ourt should stay its hand in the present case. 27. Mr. C.U. Singh, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the fifth Respondent, the informant, has joined the submissions of the first and second Respondents in opposing these appeals. It was submitted that: (i) After the order of judicial remand on 4 November 2020, an application for bail was filed on behalf of the Appellant and withdrawn; (ii) On 7 November 2020, the Sessions Court issued a notice on the revision application filed by the State against the order declining to grant remand to police custody; (iii) On 7 November 2020, the High Court posted the proceedings for pronouncement of judgment on 9 November 2020 and granted liberty to the Appellant to file an application for bail. Thereafter, an application for bail was filed on 8 November 2020 by the Appellant. A Special Leave Petition was filed in this Court thereafter. The High Court has correctly declined to enquire into the plea for quashing the FIR and the alleged mala fides on the ground that counters are still to be filed; and (iv) On 15 October 2020, the Crime Detection Unit intimated the CJM that it was commencing further i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ppeal No. 744 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (Crl) No. 5600 of 2020) 32. Mr. Mukul Rohatgi, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the Appellant, submitted that admittedly all the three Accused named in the FIR are unconnected. The Appellant is a Director in a private limited company by the name of SmartWork Business Centre Private Limited with less than one per cent of the shareholding standing in his own name. 33. The company which has offices in New Delhi and Kolkata had engaged the services of several vendors/contractors in order to furnish their business centre at Pune, one of whom was CDPL and a purchase order of Rs. 4.17 crores was issued. Thereafter, there were substantial delays and discrepancies in the execution of the work by CDPL which led to an exchange of mails. Furthermore, an invoice of over Rs. 5 crores was raised including an amount of Rs. 83.02 lacs towards GST. Pursuant to this, a payment of Rs. 4.40 crores was made but there was a genuine commercial dispute between the two companies in relation to the remaining amount. 34. It has been submitted that on the face of it, there is no basis in the FIR to even remotely implicate the Appellant in the alle....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n behalf of the Appellant. Once the prayer for a writ of habeas corpus was not pressed (as the High Court records), it was unnecessary for the High Court to devote several pages in the impugned judgment on discussing the issue. 38. The remaining prayer before the High Court was for quashing the FIR. Mr. Rohatgi submitted that the order of arrest is illegal and the Appellant is entitled to have it so declared by invoking the jurisdiction Under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was urged that the power Under Section 173(8) is to cause a "further investigation" and no power has been vested to either reinvestigate or cause a fresh investigation to be made. The power to reinvestigate or to cause fresh investigation, it was urged, is vested only in the constitutional courts. Contrary to the provisions of Section 173(8), it was urged, the Home Department in its letter to the deputy Inspector General has directed a reinvestigation. In the present case, the communication of the Home Department makes it abundantly clear that a reinvestigation was ordered under the authority of the State Home Minister which, according to the submission, i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ure of seeking regular bail in a petition filed Under Article 226 of the Constitution of India read with Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure. On the basis of the above foundation, the High Court has declined to even prima facie enquire into whether the allegations contained in the FIR, read as they stand, attract the provisions of Section 306 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. In its view, since the petition was being posted for hearing on 10 December 2020, it was not inclined to enquire into this aspect of the case and the Appellant would be at liberty to apply for regular bail Under Section 439. 42. Now, it is in this background that it becomes necessary for this Court to evaluate what, as a matter of principle, is the true import of the decision of this Court in Habib Jeelani (supra). This was a case where, on the basis of a report Under Section 154 off the Code of Criminal Procedure, an FIR was registered for offences punishable Under Sections 147, 148, 149 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code. Challenging the initiation of the criminal action, the inherent jurisdiction of the High Court to quash an FIR was invoked. The High Court (as paragraph 2 of the judg....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....i Khan [State of Bihar v. Murad Ali Khan, (1988) 4 SCC 655 : 1989 SCC (Cri) 27 : AIR 1989 SC 1] and some other authorities that had dealt with the contours of exercise of inherent powers of the High Court, thought it appropriate to mention certain category of cases by way of illustration wherein the extraordinary power Under Article 226 of the Constitution or inherent power Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure could be exercised either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. The Court also observed that it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of myriad cases wherein such power should be exercised. 12. The illustrations given by the Court need to be recapitulated: (Bhajan Lal case [State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal, 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335 : 1992 SCC (Cri) 426 : AIR 1992 SC 604], SCC pp. 378-79, para 102) (1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tate that conferment of wide power requires the Court to be more cautious. It casts an onerous and more diligent duty on the Court. 14. In this regard, it would be seemly to reproduce a passage from Kurukshetra University [Kurukshetra University v. State of Haryana, (1977) 4 SCC 451 : 1977 SCC (Cri) 613] wherein Chandrachud, J. (as his Lordship then was) opined thus: (SCC p. 451, para 2) 2. It surprises us in the extreme that the High Court thought that in the exercise of its inherent powers Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it could quash a first information report. The police had not even commenced investigation into the complaint filed by the Warden of the University and no proceeding at all was pending in any court in pursuance of the FIR. It ought to be realised that inherent powers do not confer an arbitrary jurisdiction on the High Court to act according to whim or caprice. That statutory power has to be exercised sparingly, with circumspection and in the rarest of rare cases. 15. We have referred to the said decisions only to stress upon the issue, how the exercise of jurisdiction by the High Court in a proceeding relating to qu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pass appropriate interim orders as thought apposite in law, but it is absolutely inconceivable and unthinkable to pass an order of the present nature while declining to interfere or expressing opinion that it is not appropriate to stay the investigation. This kind of order is really inappropriate and unseemly. It has no sanction in law. The courts should oust and obstruct unscrupulous litigants from invoking the inherent jurisdiction of the Court on the drop of a hat to file an application for quashing of launching an FIR or investigation and then seek relief by an interim order. It is the obligation of the Court to keep such unprincipled and unethical litigants at bay. 44. The above decision thus arose in a situation where the High Court had declined to entertain a petition for quashing an FIR Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure However, it nonetheless directed the investigating agency not to arrest the Accused during the pendency of the investigation. This was held to be impermissible by this Court. On the other hand, this Court clarified that the High Court if it thinks fit, having regard to the parameters for quashing and the self-restraint imposed by law, ha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n Penal Code, which is titled "Of Abetment". Section 107 provides: 107. Abetment of a thing.--A person abets the doing of a thing, who-- First.--Instigates any person to do that thing; or Secondly.--Engages with one or more other person or persons in any conspiracy for the doing of that thing, if an act or illegal omission takes place in pursuance of that conspiracy, and in order to the doing of that thing; or Thirdly.--Intentionally aids, by any act or illegal omission, the doing of that thing. Explanation 1.--A person who, by willful misrepresentation, or by willful concealment of a material fact which he is bound to disclose, voluntarily causes or procures, or attempts to cause or procure, a thing to be done, is said to instigate the doing of that thing. Illustration A, a public officer, is authorised by a warrant from a Court of Justice to apprehend Z, B, knowing that fact and also that C is not Z, willfully represents to A that C is Z, and thereby intentionally causes A to apprehend C. Here B abets by instigation the apprehension of C. Explanation 2.--Whoever, either prior to or at the time of the commission of an act, does....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Accused to instigate or aid in committing suicide, conviction cannot be sustained. The intention of the legislature and the ratio of the cases decided by this Court is clear that in order to convict a person Under Section 306 Indian Penal Code there has to be a clear mens rea to commit the offence. It also requires an active act or direct act which led the deceased to commit suicide seeing no option and that act must have been intended to push the deceased into such a position that he committed suicide. 48. Madan Mohan Singh v. State of Gujarat (2010) 8 SCC 628 was specifically a case which arose in the context of a petition Under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure where the High Court had dismissed the petition for quashing an FIR registered for offences Under Sections 306 and 294(B) of the Indian Penal Code. In that case, the FIR was registered on a complaint of the spouse of the deceased who was working as a driver with the Accused. The driver had been rebuked by the employer and was later found to be dead on having committed suicide. A suicide note was relied upon in the FIR, the contents of which indicated that the driver had not been given a fixed vehicle....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing any material for offence Under Section 306 Indian Penal Code either in the FIR or in the so-called suicide note. The Court noted that the suicide note expressed a state of anguish of the deceased and "cannot be depicted as expressing anything intentional on the part of the Accused that the deceased might commit suicide". Reversing the judgment of the High Court, the petition Under Section 482 was allowed and the FIR was quashed. 49. In a concurring judgment delivered by one of us (Dhananjaya Y. Chandrachud J) in the decision of the Constitution Bench in Common Cause (supra), the provisions of Section 107 were explained with the following observations: 458. For abetting an offence, the person abetting must have intentionally aided the commission of the crime. Abetment requires an instigation to commit or intentionally aiding the commission of a crime. It presupposes a course of conduct or action which (in the context of the present discussion) facilitates another to end life. Hence abetment of suicide is an offence expressly punishable Under Sections 305 and 306 Indian Penal Code. 50. More recently in M. Arjunan v. State (represented by its Inspector of Police)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the act of suicide. As explained and reiterated by this Court in the decisions above-referred, instigation means to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do an act. If the persons who committed suicide had been hypersensitive and the action of Accused is otherwise not ordinarily expected to induce a similarly circumstanced person to commit suicide, it may not be safe to hold the Accused guilty of abetment of suicide. But, on the other hand, if the Accused by his acts and by his continuous course of conduct creates a situation which leads the deceased perceiving no other option except to commit suicide, the case may fall within the four-corners of Section 306 Indian Penal Code. If the Accused plays an active role in tarnishing the self-esteem and self-respect of the victim, which eventually draws the victim to commit suicide, the Accused may be held guilty of abetment of suicide. The question of mens rea on the part of the Accused in such cases would be examined with reference to the actual acts and deeds of the Accused and if the acts and deeds are only of such nature where the Accused intended nothing more than harassment or snap show of anger, a particular case may....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Penal Code. A person serving in the office of the Deputy Director of Education Aurangabad had committed suicide on 8 August 2017. His wife made a complaint to the police that her husband was suffering from mental torture as his superiors were getting heavy work done from her husband. This resulted in him having to work from 10 AM to 10 PM and even at odd hours and on holidays. The specific allegation against the Appellant was that he had stopped the deceased's salary for one month and was threatening the deceased that his increment would be stopped. This Court noted that there was no suicide note, and the only material on record was in the form of assertions made by the deceased's wife in her report to the police. The Court went on to hold that the facts on record were inadequate and insufficient to bring home the charge of abetment of suicide Under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The mere factum of work being assigned by the Appellant to the deceased, or the stoppage of salary for a month, was not enough to prove criminal intent or guilty mind. Consequently, proceedings against the Appellant were quashed. 53. On the other hand, we must also notice the decision in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....words used by the Accused which led to the commission of suicide. 54. In Narayan Malhari Thorat v. Vinayak Deorao Bhagat (2019) 13 SCC 598, this Court, speaking through Justice U.U. Lalit, reversed the judgment of a Division Bench of the High Court which had quashed criminal proceedings in exercise of the jurisdiction Under Section 482. This was a case where the FIR was registered pursuant to the information received from the Appellant. The FIR stated that the son and daughter-in-law of the Appellant were teachers in Zila Parishad School. The Respondent used to call the daughter-in-law of the Appellant on the phone and used to harass her. Moreover, despite the efforts of the son of the Appellant, the Respondent did not desist from doing so. This Court noted: 12. We now consider the facts of the present case. There are definite allegations that the first Respondent would keep on calling the wife of the victim on her mobile and keep harassing her which allegations are supported by the statements of the mother and the wife of the victim recorded during investigation. The record shows that 3-4 days prior to the suicide there was an altercation between the victim and the fir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xercised sparingly. These words, however, are not meaningless incantations, but have to be assessed with reference to the contents of the particular FIR before the High Court. If the High Court were to carry out a prima facie evaluation, it would have been impossible for it not to notice the disconnect between the FIR and the provisions of Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The failure of the High Court to do so has led it to adopting a position where it left the Appellant to pursue his remedies for regular bail Under Section 439. The High Court was clearly in error in failing to perform a duty which is entrusted to it while evaluating a petition Under Section 482 albeit at the interim stage. 56. The petition before the High Court was instituted Under Article 226 of the Constitution and Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. While dealing with the petition Under Section 482 for quashing the FIR, the High Court has not considered whether prima facie the ingredients of the offence have been made out in the FIR. If the High Court were to have carried out this exercise, it would (as we have held in this judgment) have been apparent that the ingredients of the offence have....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In the backdrop of these principles, it has become necessary to scrutinize the contents of the FIR in the case at hand. In this batch of cases, a prima facie evaluation of the FIR does not establish the ingredients of the offence of abetment of suicide Under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code. The Appellants are residents of India and do not pose a flight risk during the investigation or the trial. There is no apprehension of tampering of evidence or witnesses. Taking these factors into consideration, the order dated 11 November 2020 envisaged the release of the Appellants on bail. J Human liberty and the role of Courts 60. Human liberty is a precious constitutional value, which is undoubtedly subject to Regulation by validly enacted legislation. As such, the citizen is subject to the edicts of criminal law and procedure. Section 482 recognizes the inherent power of the High Court to make such orders as are necessary to give effect to the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure "or prevent abuse of the process of any Court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice". Decisions of this Court require the High Courts, in exercis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Courts must be alive to the need to safeguard the public interest in ensuring that the due enforcement of criminal law is not obstructed. The fair investigation of crime is an aid to it. Equally it is the duty of courts across the spectrum - the district judiciary, the High Courts and the Supreme Court - to ensure that the criminal law does not become a weapon for the selective harassment of citizens. Courts should be alive to both ends of the spectrum - the need to ensure the proper enforcement of criminal law on the one hand and the need, on the other, of ensuring that the law does not become a ruse for targeted harassment. Liberty across human eras is as tenuous as tenuous can be. Liberty survives by the vigilance of her citizens, on the cacophony of the media and in the dusty corridors of courts alive to the Rule of (and not by) law. Yet, much too often, liberty is a casualty when one of these components is found wanting. 61. Mr. Kapil Sibal, Mr. Amit Desai and Mr. Chander Uday Singh are undoubtedly right in submitting that the procedural hierarchy of courts in matters concerning the grant of bail needs to be respected. However, there was a failure of the High Court to disch....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s. We must in particular also emphasise the role of the district judiciary, which provides the first point of interface to the citizen. Our district judiciary is wrongly referred to as the 'subordinate judiciary'. It may be subordinate in hierarchy but it is not subordinate in terms of its importance in the lives of citizens or in terms of the duty to render justice to them. High Courts get burdened when courts of first instance decline to grant anticipatory bail or bail in deserving cases. This continues in the Supreme Court as well, when High Courts do not grant bail or anticipatory bail in cases falling within the parameters of the law. The consequence for those who suffer incarceration are serious. Common citizens without the means or resources to move the High Courts or this Court languish as undertrials. Courts must be alive to the situation as it prevails on the ground - in the jails and police stations where human dignity has no protector. As judges, we would do well to remind ourselves that it is through the instrumentality of bail that our criminal justice system's primordial interest in preserving the presumption of innocence finds its most eloquent expressio....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... judge will put all other matters aside and hear it. ... It is our earnest hope that our courts will exhibit acute awareness to the need to expand the footprint of liberty and use our approach as a decision-making yardstick for future cases involving the grant of bail. 66. Since the proceedings are pending before the High Court, we clarify that the observations on the facts contained in the present judgment are confined to a determination whether a case for grant of interim protection was made out. Equally, the observations which are contained in the impugned order of the High Court were also at the interim stage and will not affect the final resolution of the issues which arise and have been raised before the High Court. K Conclusion 67. While reserving the judgment at the conclusion of arguments, this Court had directed the release of all the three Appellants on bail pending the disposal of the proceedings before the High Court. The following operative directions were issued on 11 November 2020: 9. We are of the considered view that the High Court was in error in rejecting the applications for the grant of interim bail. We accordingly order and direct that Ar....