The Supreme Court observed that it cannot appreciate why a person who was not arrested during investigation, on charge sheet being filed, be sent to custody when he appears on receipt of summons?
The Supreme Court observed that it cannot appreciate why a person who was not arrested during investigation, on charge sheet being filed, be sent to custody when he appears on receipt of summons?
It will be appropriate to lay down some principles in this behalf, the bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and Hrishikesh Roy said.
In this case, the appellant- accused contended that he had joined investigation but was not arrested. When the charge sheet was filed he sought anticipatory bail which was rejected by the High Court.
When the SLP against the High Court order came up for admission, the bench asked the accused’s counsel why he did not appear after summons were sent in pursuance to cognizance being taken. The court said that he ought to have appeared and applied for regular bail and there should have been no case for anticipatory bail at that stage. In reply, the counsel pointed out that the system that is followed especially in the State of Uttar Pradesh is that even if a person is not arrested during investigation, on charge sheet being filed, more so, in such cases of CBI a person is sent to custody and thus, his appearance and applying for bail would have resulted in his being sent to custody.?
“Prima facie, we cannot appreciate why in such a scenario is there a requirement for the petitioner being sent to custody. Be that as it may, it will be appropriate to lay down some principles in this behalf.”, the bench said while issuing notice in this case.
The court also stayed the execution of non-bailable warrant and directed not to arrest the accused.
Case: Satender Kumar Antil vs. CBI
