Criminal Procedure Code. Section 438
Chandru vs State of Karnataka. Criminal Petition 6734/2020 decided on 4 December 2020.
Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/351161/1/CRLP6734-20-04-12-2020.pdf
Relevant paragraphs: 4. Admittedly, at the initial stage, this petitioner was granted bail in the present case subject to conditions. It is also admitted that the petitioner has not appeared before the trial Court as directed by the Court while granting bail. It is also admitted that the proclamation under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. is already issued and NBW is pending against the petitioner. Now the question arises as to whether at this stage, the petitioner once again can invoke Section 438 of Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in this regard. It is relevant to mention the decision of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Pradeep Sharma reported in (2014) 2 SCC 171 wherein, the Court referred to its earlier judgment in the case of Lavesh vs. State (NCT of Delhi) reported in (2012) 8 SCC 730 extracted paragraph 12 therein and held as under:
“16. Recently, in Lavesh v. State (NCT of Delhi), this Court (of which both of us were parties) considered the scope of granting relief under Section 438 vis-à-vis a person who was declared as an absconder or proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of the Code. In para 12, this Court held as under:
12. From these materials and information, it is clear that the present appellant was not available for interrogation and investigation and was declared as ‘absconder’. Normally, when the accused is ‘absconding’ and declared as a ‘proclaimed offender’, there is no question of granting anticipatory bail. We reiterate that when a person against whom a warrant had been issued and is absconding or concealing himself in order to avoid execution of warrant and declared as a proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of the Code he is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.
7. It is clear from the above decision that if anyone is declared as an absconder/proclaimed offender in terms of Section 82 of the Code, he is not entitled to the relief of anticipatory bail.”In view of the above, the position of law is clear on the subject. The petitioner was already granted bail and he had not complied with the conditions imposed in the said order. The petitioner is already proclaimed as an absconding accused and NBW is issued against him. Therefore, the petitioner is not entitled to seek the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. at this stage.
Hence, the petition is dismissed.
Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal.
Daksha Legal 