OF 2022 (Arising from SLP(Criminal) No.8008-8010/2021)
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/quashing-of-high-court-judgment-on-land-acquisition-proceedings/
Central Bureau of Investigation…Appellant Versus P.S. 5010/2021, 5109/2021 and 5809/2021 and a separate order dated 16.11.2021 passed by the High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Application No 4424/2021, by which the High Court has allowed the said bail applications and has granted anticipatory bail to the private respondents herein – original accused in connection with Crime No RC/Criminal/2021/S0007 of SC-II Delhi Police Station registered by the Central Bureau of Investigation(CBI) alleging offences punishable under Sections 120B, 167, 218, 330, 323, 195, 348, 365, 477A and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), the CBI has preferred the present appeals.
The allegations against the accused in the present FIR relate back to the year 1994 in connection with Crime
No 225/1994/246/1994 registered by the Kerala Police and the Intelligence Bureau (IB) officials which was registered against one Mariyam Rashida. The Division Bench overturned the decision of the learned Single Judge setting aside the order of the State Government declining to take appropriate action against the police officials and remitted the matter to the State Government.
Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/final-decision-and-disclosure-in-collegium-meetings/
After perusing the report, this Court vide order dated 16.04.2021 directed the Registry to forward one copy of the report to the Director/Acting Director of CBI who may then proceed in the matter in accordance with law being a Court directed enquiry. By the impugned common judgment and order, the High Court has allowed the said bail applications and granted anticipatory bail to the private respondents herein, who were all officials either with the Kerala Police or with the IB at the relevant time.
Siby Mathews applicant before the High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No 4424/2021
(respondent No.1 in Criminal Appeal arising from SLP(Criminal)
No 4097/2022) was initially granted the anticipatory bail by the learned trial Court, however, the anticipatory bail period was restricted to 60 days only and thereafter he approached the High Court by way of the aforesaid criminal miscellaneous application No 4424/2021 and by the impugned judgment and order dated 16.11.2021, the High Court has allowed the said application and has granted the anticipatory bail to him also. However, from the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court, it appears that the High Court has made some observations without considering the individual role played by the respective accused when they were working in the Kerala Police/IB and without considering the nature of allegations against them, we are of the opinion that the matters need to be remanded to the High Court to consider the anticipatory bail applications afresh.
In view of the above, the impugned judgment(s) and order(s) passed by the High Court granting anticipatory bail to the respondents – original accused deserve to be quashed and set aside and the matters are to be remitted to the High Court to consider the anticipatory bail applications afresh and thereafter to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law and on their own merits and taking into consideration the observations made hereinabove.
All the Anticipatory Bail Applications are remitted to the High Court to decide the same afresh in accordance with law and on their own merits and in light of the observations made hereinabove.
Case Title: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. P.S. JAYAPRAKASH (2022 INSC 1243)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-002147-002149 / 2022
