1
ITEM NO.15 Court 6 (Video Conferencing) SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 5191/2021
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 01-07-2021
in CRMABA No. 7598/2021 passed by the High Court Of Judicature At
Allahabad)
SATENDER KUMAR ANTIL Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION & ANR. Respondent(s)
(IA No. 105098/2021 - EXEMPTION FROM FILING AFFIDAVIT
IA No. 105096/2021 - INTERVENTION APPLICATION
IA No. 90323/2021 - PERMISSION TO FILE ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENTS/FACTS/ANNEXURES)
Date : 07-10-2021 The matter was called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KISHAN KAUL
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M. SUNDRESH
For Petitioner(s) Mr. Sidharth Luthra, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Akbar Siddique, AOR
Mr. Rajneesh Chuni, Adv.
Mr. Malik Javed Ansari, Adv.
Mr. Chirag Madan, Adv.
Mr. Hardik Rupal, Adv.
Mr. Parv Garg, Adv.
Mr. Adeel Talib, Adv.
Mr. Fareed Siddiqui, Adv.
Mr. Shashank Gaurav, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. S.V. Raju, Ld. ASG
Ms. Sairica Raju, Adv.
Mr. Annam Venkatesh, Adv.
Ms. Priyanka Das, Adv.
Mr. Udai Khanna, Adv.
Signature Not Verified
Mr. Arvind Kumar Sharma, AOR
Digitally signed by
Charanjeet kaur
Date: 2021.10.07
17:19:27 IST
Reason: Mr.Vikram Chaudhary, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Mahesh Agarwal, Adv.
Mr. Pranjal Krishna, Adv.
Mr. E.C. Agrawala, AOR
2
Mr. Vikram Chaudhri, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Harshit Sethi, Adv.
Mr. Keshavam Chaudhri, Adv.
Ms. Anzu. K. Varkey, AOR
Ms. Ria Khanna, Adv.
Mr. Kapil Dahiya, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Application for intervention is allowed.
We have been provided assistance both by
Mr. S.V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General
and Mr. Sidharth Luthra, learned senior counsel and
there is broad unanimity in terms of the suggestions
made by learned ASG. In terms of the suggestions,
the offences have been categorized and guidelines
are sought to be laid down for grant of bail,
without fettering the discretion of the courts
concerned and keeping in mind the statutory
provisions.
We are inclined to accept the guidelines and
make them a part of the order of the Court for the
benefit of the Courts below. The guidelines are as
under :
“Categories/Types of Offences
A) Offences punishable with imprisonment of 7
years or less not falling in category B & D.
B) Offences punishable with death, imprisonment
for life, or imprisonment for more than 7 years.
C) Offences punishable under Special Acts
3
containing stringent provisions for bail like NDPS
(S.37), PMLA (S.45), UAPA (S.43D(5), Companies Act,
212(6), etc.
D) Economic offences not covered by Special
Acts.
REQUISITE CONDITIONS
1) Not arrested during investigation.
2) Cooperated throughout in the investigation
including appearing before Investigating Officer
whenever called.
(No need to forward such an accused along with the chargesheet
(Siddharth Vs. State of UP, 2021 SCC online SC 615)
CATEGORY A
After filing of chargesheet/complaint taking
of cognizance
a) Ordinary summons at the 1st instance/including
permitting appearance through Lawyer.
b) If such an accused does not appear despite
service of summons, then Bailable Warrant for
physical appearance may be issued.
c) NBW on failure to failure to appear despite
issuance of Bailable Warrant.
d) NBW may be cancelled or converted into a
Bailable Warrant/Summons without insisting physical
appearance of accused, if such an application is
moved on behalf of the accused before execution of
the NBW on an undertaking of the accused to appear
physically on the next date/s of hearing.
e) Bail applications of such accused on
appearance may be decided w/o the accused being
taken in physical custody or by granting interim
bail till the bail application is decided.
4
CATEGORY B/D
On appearance of the accused in Court
pursuant to process issued bail application to be
decided on merits.
CATEGORY C
Same as Category B & D with the additional
condition of compliance of the provisions of Bail
uner NDPS S. 37, 45 PMLA, 212(6) Companies Act 43
d(5) of UAPA, POSCO etc.”
Needless to say that the category A deals
with both police cases and complaint cases.
The trial Courts and the High Courts will
keep in mind the aforesaid guidelines while
considering bail applications. The caveat which
has been put by learned ASG is that where the
accused have not cooperated in the investigation nor
appeared before the Investigating Officers, nor
answered summons when the Court feels that judicial
custody of the accused is necessary for the
completion of the trial, where further investigation
including a possible recovery is needed, the
aforesaid approach cannot give them benefit,
something we agree with.
We may also notice an aspect submitted by
Mr. Luthra that while issuing notice to consider
bail, the trial Court is not precluded from granting
5
interim bail taking into consideration the conduct
of the accused during the investigation which has
not warranted arrest. On this aspect also we would
give our imprimatur and naturally the bail
application to be ultimately considered, would be
guided by the statutory provisions.
The suggestions of learned ASG which we have
adopted have categorized a separate set of offences
as “economic Offences” not covered by the special
Acts. In this behalf, suffice to say on the
submission of Mr. Luthra that this Court in Sanjay
Chandra vs.CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40 has observed in para
39 that in determining whether to grant bail both
aspects have to be taken into account:
a) seriousness of the charge and
b) severity of punishment.
Thus, it is not as if economic offences are
completely taken out of the aforesaid guidelines
but do form a different nature of offences and thus
the seriousness of the charge has to be taken into
account but simultaneously, the severity of the
punishment imposed by the statute would also be a
factor.
We appreciate the assistance given by the
learned counsels and the positive approach adopted
by the learned ASG.
The SLP stands disposed of and the matter
6
need not be listed further.
A copy of this order be circulated to the
Registrars of the different High Courts to be
further circulated to the trial Courts so that the
unnecessary bail matters do not come up to this
Court.
This is the only purpose for which we have
issued these guidelines, but they are not fettered
on the powers of the Courts.
Pending applications stand disposed of.
[CHARANJEET KAUR] [POONAM VAID]
ASTT. REGISTRAR-cum-PS COURT MASTER (NSH)
