Case Note & Summary
The dispute arose from an FIR registered against the appellant, a businessman, for offences under the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita and Information Technology Act, alleging sexual harassment and rape by a former employee. The appellant had employed the complainant as an Executive Assistant, who resigned and later, along with her husband, demanded Rs. 30 crores in a meeting to settle rumours of an illicit relationship. The appellant filed a complaint against them for extortion, leading to their arrest and bail. Subsequently, the complainant filed the impugned FIR. The appellant sought anticipatory bail, which the High Court denied, citing the seriousness of offences and risk of witness influence due to his affluence. The Supreme Court granted leave and issued interim protection. After failed mediation, arguments were heard where the appellant contended the FIR was a counter-blast to extort money, while the State and complainant emphasized the need for custodial interrogation and witness protection. The Court analyzed the facts, noting the financial settlement demand and counter-complaints, and observed that the FIR appeared retaliatory. Considering the interim protection and ongoing investigation, the Court held the appellant entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, setting aside the High Court's order. The appeal was allowed with conditions including cash security, cooperation, and non-interference with witnesses.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Anticipatory Bail - Grant of Anticipatory Bail Under Section 482 BNSS - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 482 - Appellant sought anticipatory bail in FIR alleging sexual harassment and rape; High Court denied bail citing serious offences and risk of witness influence. Supreme Court considered facts including prior financial settlement demand of Rs. 30 crores by complainant and counter-complaints, and interim protection granted earlier. Held that appellant entitled to anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS, setting aside High Court order, with conditions including cash security and cooperation. (Paras 21-24) B) Criminal Law - Counter-Blast FIR - Financial Settlement as Motive - Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, Sections 351(2), 64, 74, 75, 79 read with Section 3(5); Information Technology Act, 2000, Section 67A - FIR lodged by complainant after appellant filed complaint against her and husband for extortion; Supreme Court noted that had financial settlement been concluded, no criminal proceedings would have been initiated, indicating FIR as counter-blast. This factor influenced grant of anticipatory bail, emphasizing need to assess motives in bail decisions. (Paras 21-23) C) Criminal Procedure - Interim Protection - Making Interim Order Absolute - Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Supreme Court had granted interim protection to appellant subject to cooperation; after hearing arguments and noting investigation ongoing, Court made interim order absolute, leading to final grant of anticipatory bail. This demonstrates use of interim measures to balance liberty and investigation needs. (Paras 22-23)
Premium Content
The Headnote is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access key legal points
Issue of Consideration: Whether the High Court erred in declining anticipatory bail to the appellant in FIR alleging offences under Sections 351(2), 64, 74, 75, 79 read with Section 3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 and Section 67A of Information Technology Act, 2000, considering the circumstances including a prior financial settlement demand and counter-complaints.
Premium Content
The Issue of Consideration is only available to subscribed members.
Subscribe Now to access critical case issues
Final Decision
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside; appellant granted anticipatory bail under Section 482 BNSS with conditions: cash security of Rs. 1,00,000 with two sureties, cooperation with investigation, no witness influence or evidence tampering.
