Supreme Court Sets Aside Anticipatory Bail in Murder Case Due to Absconding Accused and Proclaimed Offender Status -- High Court's Direction for Surrender and Regular Bail Deemed Illegal Under CrPC and IPC

Nature of Litigation: Criminal appeal challenging the High Court's order granting anticipatory bail to the accused in a murder case

Remedy Sought

The appellant, the original complainant, sought setting aside of the High Court's order granting anticipatory bail to the accused

Filing Reason

The appeal was filed due to the High Court's erroneous grant of anticipatory bail to an absconding accused declared a proclaimed offender

Previous Decisions

The trial court dismissed the accused's anticipatory bail application on 09.12.2019 -- The High Court dismissed the first anticipatory bail application (MCRC No.4823 of 2020) on 11.02.2020 -- The High Court dismissed the second anticipatory bail application on 19.01.2021 (order not on record) -- The High Court granted the third anticipatory bail application via the impugned order dated 19.01.2024

Issues

Whether the High Court erred in granting anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC to an accused who was absconding and declared a proclaimed offender Whether the High Court's direction for the accused to surrender and apply for regular bail, with an assurance of bail on the same day, was legal and proper

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the accused was absconding since the incident and declared a proclaimed offender, making him ineligible for anticipatory bail -- The appellant contended that the High Court's order was contrary to law as it directed grant of regular bail without proper surrender The respondents likely argued for the grant of anticipatory bail based on the accused's application, but specific arguments are not detailed in the provided judgment excerpts

Ratio Decidendi

Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC cannot be granted to an absconding accused or proclaimed offender -- The High Court's direction for surrender and automatic grant of regular bail is erroneous when the accused has evaded arrest and is declared a proclaimed offender -- The court must consider the accused's conduct, including absconding status, in bail decisions, especially in serious offences like murder under Section 302 of the IPC

Judgment Excerpts

The High Court disposed of the third anticipatory bail application filed by Respondent No.2, while directing the Accused to surrender before the trial Court and move an application for regular bail The Accused had been absconding since the date of the incident, i.e., 02.06.2017 Notwithstanding the exchange of the aforesaid letters, there is nothing on record to indicate that the absconding Accused was declared as a proclaimed offender under Section 82 of the CrPC The Court noted that the Accused had been absconding since the date of the incident itself, and that a reward had been declared for his arrest The High Court recorded that the Accused was a proclaimed offender and was absconding since the registration of the Subject FIR

Procedural History

FIR No.217/2017 registered on 02.06.2017 under various IPC sections -- FIR No.226/2017 (Subject FIR) registered on 03.06.2017 under IPC and Arms Act sections, with Section 302 added later -- FIR No.227/2017 (Cross FIR) registered on 03.06.2017 -- Police sought property details and initiation of proceedings under Sections 82 and 83 of CrPC in July 2017 -- Accused filed anticipatory bail application before trial court on 28.11.2019, dismissed on 09.12.2019 -- First anticipatory bail application before High Court (MCRC No.4823 of 2020) dismissed on 11.02.2020 -- Second anticipatory bail application before High Court dismissed on 19.01.2021 -- Third anticipatory bail application granted by High Court via impugned order dated 19.01.2024 -- Supreme Court appeal filed and allowed, setting aside the High Court's order