In a recent judgment, the Andhra Pradesh High Court underscored the exceptional nature of anticipatory bail, emphasizing that it should be granted only under extraordinary circumstances, particularly in cases involving grave allegations such as sexual harassment. Justice T. Mallikarjuna Rao, presiding over the case, highlighted the necessity of custodial interrogation to ensure a comprehensive and unimpeded investigation.
The case in question involved a petitioner charged under Sections 62 read with 64(1), 74, 75(2), and 333 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS), along with Section 7 read with 8 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 (POCSO Act). The prosecution alleged that the accused forcibly entered the victim's residence, assaulted her, and attempted to commit rape. The victim's cries attracted neighbors, prompting the accused to flee the scene.
The petitioner contended that the allegations were a result of existing disputes with the complainant and pointed to a three-day delay in reporting the incident. He also argued the absence of concrete evidence supporting the attempt to commit rape and expressed willingness to comply with any conditions imposed for bail.
However, the Court emphasized that in non-bailable offenses, the nature and gravity of the crime are paramount considerations when deciding on bail applications. Justice Rao noted that while pre-trial imprisonment should not serve as a substitute for punishment without proper judicial scrutiny, granting bail in cases with serious allegations could adversely impact societal interests.
The Court further asserted that denying custodial interrogation could lead to significant gaps in the investigation, potentially compromising its integrity. Therefore, it is imperative to allow investigating officers the autonomy to conduct thorough inquiries, especially in cases involving severe accusations.
This ruling aligns with the Supreme Court's stance that the absence of a need for custodial interrogation alone does not justify granting anticipatory bail. The apex court has clarified that while custodial interrogation is a factor in bail considerations, the primary focus should be on the prima facie case against the accused and the severity of the alleged offense. In instances where serious allegations are present, courts should exercise caution in granting anticipatory bail to ensure that investigations proceed without hindrance.
In conclusion, the Andhra Pradesh High Court's decision reinforces the principle that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy, reserved for exceptional situations where the court is convinced of the petitioner's unlikely misuse of liberty. The necessity for custodial interrogation, especially in cases with grave allegations, is crucial to facilitate thorough investigations and uphold the integrity of the judicial process.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.