Bail’s the rule, but not anticipatory one: MPHC

Bhopal/Jabalpur: The MP high court, while rejecting an application for anticipatory bail of a person from Panna district, observed that bail may be a right of an accused, but by any stretch of imagination, it can’t be said about anticipatory bail.

“Grant of interim protection or protection to the accused in serious cases may lead to miscarriage of justice and may hamper the investigation to a great extent as it may sometimes lead to tampering or distraction of the evidence...,” said the court.

The Supreme Court in the case of Tusharbhai Rajnikantbhai Shah v. Kamal Dayani had recently observed that the power to grant anticipatory bail should not be exercised in a routine manner, but with great degree of circumspection, the judge added.

Hearing the anticipatory bail application of Rampal Yadav apprehending arrest under section 34 (2) of the Excise Act for keeping 66 litres of liquor under a pit in his cowshed, the court further noted that though there are examples when the courts have given anticipatory bail in cases registered under section 34 (2) of the Excise Act; however, provisions of the Act bar the courts from entertaining application of anticipatory bail in such cases.

Rampal Yadav in his application argued that he was made an accused in the case only on the basis of the statement of his nephew who was arrested by the police from the cowshed where the liquor was kept and he was not involved in the crime in any manner. The prosecution said that the cowshed is owned by him where the illicit liquor was kept.

After hearing both sides, the bench of Justice Ramkumar Choubey said, “Though in many cases, it was held that bail is the rule, it cannot, by any stretch of imagination, be said that anticipatory bail is the rule. It cannot be the rule, and the question of its grant should be left to the cautious and judicious discretion by the court depending on the facts and circumstances of each case.”

The judge further said that though the defence counsel referred to a couple of cases where anticipatory bail has been given by the MP high court in cases registered under section 34 (2) of the Excise Act, but section 59 (1) of the Act bars court from entertaining anticipatory bail application in such matters.