Key Legal Question:
Whether an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) is maintainable when the accused is already in judicial custody in connection with a different case.

Facts:

• The appeal arose from a Bombay High Court judgment that allowed Respondent No. 1 (Amar S. Mulchandani) to seek anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC despite already being in custody for a separate case (ECIR No. 10 of 2021).
• The appellant (Dhanraj Aswani) contended that a person in custody cannot seek anticipatory bail in a different case, arguing that being in custody negates the "reason to believe" required for arrest under Section 438.
• The High Court dismissed this objection, holding that being in custody for one offense does not preclude a person from seeking pre-arrest bail in connection with another offense.

Acts and Sections Discussed:

• Section 438, Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC):
  Governs anticipatory bail, allowing individuals to seek bail if they have "reason to believe" they may be arrested for a non-bailable offense.

• Indian Penal Code (IPC):
  Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, and 471, which deal with offenses like criminal breach of trust, cheating, and forgery.

Legal Arguments:

On behalf of the Appellant (Dhanraj Aswani):

• A person already in custody cannot have a "reason to believe" they may be arrested, as they are already under arrest, rendering anticipatory bail under Section 438 CrPC inapplicable.
• Practical issues arise in complying with bail conditions, like appearing for interrogation, if the person is already in custody.

On behalf of Respondent No. 1 (Amar S. Mulchandani):

• Right to anticipatory bail is a remedy under Article 21 (right to personal liberty) of the Constitution, and the fact that the accused is in custody for another offense does not eliminate this right.
• Section 438 CrPC does not specifically bar persons in custody from seeking anticipatory bail in another case.

Ratio Decidendi (Legal Reasoning):

The court emphasized the wide discretion afforded to courts under Section 438 CrPC to protect personal liberty. A person in custody for one case can still apprehend arrest in another case, and denying anticipatory bail on the grounds of custody in a different case would unduly restrict the right to personal liberty under Article 21.

Anticipatory Bail, Judicial Custody, Section 438 CrPC, Supreme Court, Criminal Law, Personal Liberty, Article 21