#bail procedure under criminal procedure code

[imranirshad786]

Understanding Bail: Types, Grounds and Legal Provisions

The Concept of Bail: Explained and Explored

Introduction

Bail is a well-established legal concept that has been in existence for a long time. The fundamental philosophy behind bail is to allow the accused to be released from the custody of law enforcement agencies and placed under the supervision of sureties. It serves as an interim order that can be revoked by the court at any stage, depending on the circumstances.Relevant Provisions: Understanding the Legal Framework

To better understand the concept of bail, it is essential to consider the relevant provisions within the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.). In this regard, Sections 496, 497, and 498 of the Cr.P.C. play a significant role. Click Here to Read Full Article

[legalhub16]

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

RIGHTS OF AN ARRESTED PERSON

Introduction Everyone should be treated with respect, and being accused of a crime doesn't make someone less human. Because of the main idea in Indian criminal law that someone is innocent until proven guilty, our country's laws are set up to protect that. This means that a person is thought to be innocent until they are found guilty. The accused also have rights that are protected by the Indian Constitution and the Code of Criminal Procedure. These rights make sure that they are tried fairly. A person who is being investigated for a crime has certain rights that should be respected during the investigation or hearing, and they should not be arrested without a reason or without following the law.

Here are some of the most important rights of someone who has been arrested:

Right to know the grounds of Arrest - The person who was arrested has the right to know why they were taken. Being told about this quickly helps them in many ways. It gives the person a chance to clear up any mistakes or clear up any confusion in the thoughts of the people who are arresting them. While someone is in jail, they have this important right that is protected by both the Code and the Indian Constitution, which is part of Article 22. Section 50 (1) of the Code says that if someone is taken without a warrant, whether by a police officer or someone else, that person must tell the person why they are arresting them. Section 75 of the Code says that anyone carrying out an arrest warrant must tell the person being held the substance, or reason for the arrest.

Right to silence - The right to stay silent is not officially recognised by any law, but it is protected by the Code, the Evidence Act, and the Indian Constitution. No one who has been arrested can be forced to say anything or confess. This right mostly applies to statements made in court or when a confession is taken. The Magistrate must make sure that the statements or confessions are given freely. Article 20(2) of the Constitution talks about the concept of self-incrimination and says that no one can be forced to testify against themselves. In their opinion on this concept, the court said, "No one can force anyone to give a statement or answer questions, and the accused person has the right to remain silent during the process of interrogation."

Right to be told about the right to bail - The Code says that someone who has been caught and is suspected of committing a bailable crime has the right to be freed on bail. It also says that if an officer arrests someone without a warrant, unless they are suspected of a crime for which bail is not available, they must tell the person that they can be freed on bail and set up sureties to help them.

Right to be brought before the magistrate as soon as possible- Article 22(2) of the Constitution says that the police must bring someone who has been arrested before a magistrate within 24 hours of arrest, no matter if they had a warrant or not. There are similar rules in sections 56 and 76 of the Code that say an arrested person should be brought to court right away, whether they were taken with or without a warrant. It is against the law to hold someone if this is not followed.

Right to talk to a lawyer - This is a right that a jailed person has under both the Code and the Constitution. This right starts when the person is arrested. No one who is arrested should be refused the right to talk to a lawyer of his choice, according to Article 22(1) of the Constitution. Section 303 of the Code says that anyone who is charged of a crime in a Criminal Court or who is being sued under the Code has the right to have a lawyer of his choice represent him. The Supreme Court has said that the officer can be present while the client talks to a lawyer, but the client cannot be heard by the officer.

Right to be examined by a medical officer - Arrested individuals are entitled to a medical examination per the provisions of Section 54 (1) of the Code. A medical officer employed by the federal or state government is required to conduct medical examinations on all individuals who are taken into custody. If no designated medical officer is available, a licenced physician must examine the detainee. The bodily examination can only be conducted by or under the supervision of a female medical officer or registered practitioner if the individual being arrested is a female. A copy of this record must be provided to the individual who conducted the arrest or to someone designated by the arrested person. The medical practitioner is obligated to document the examination and note any signs of violence or injuries sustained by the arrested person, as well as the approximate time when these injuries or marks were inflicted.

[market-news-24]

Today's Current Affairs: Landmark Supreme Court Judgment on Enforcement Directorate's Arrest Powers The Supreme Court has made a significant ruling on Thursday, May 16, stating that the Enforcement Directorate and its officers cannot arrest an accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act after the Special Court has taken cognizance of the complaint. This decision has far-reaching implications for cases involving money laundering allegations. The bench of Justice Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan emphasized that the ED must apply to the special court if they seek custody of an accused, marking a shift in how such cases are handled. This judgment comes after a legal battle over bail conditions for individuals accused of money laundering, highlighting the complexities of the legal system in dealing with financial crimes. [ad_2] Download Latest Movies in HD Quality Downloading In 15 seconds Scroll Down to End of This Post const downloadBtn = document.getElementById('download-btn'); const timerBtn = document.getElementById('timer-btn'); const downloadLinkBtn = document.getElementById('download-link-btn'); downloadBtn.addEventListener('click', () => downloadBtn.style.display = 'none'; timerBtn.style.display = 'block'; let timeLeft = 15; const timerInterval = setInterval(() => if (timeLeft === 0) clearInterval(timerInterval); timerBtn.style.display = 'none'; downloadLinkBtn.style.display = 'inline-block'; // Add your download functionality here console.log('Download started!'); else timerBtn.textContent = `Downloading In $timeLeft seconds`; timeLeft--; , 1000); ); [ad_1] 1. What did the Supreme Court rule regarding arrest by Enforcement Directorate (ED) under PMLA? - ED officers can arrest an accused after the Special Court takes cognizance - ED cannot arrest an accused after the Special Court takes cognizance - ED can arrest an accused without any limitations - ED can only arrest an accused with prior approval from the Special Court Answer: ED cannot arrest an accused after the Special Court takes cognizance 2. Where does the accused have to apply for custody if the ED wants to arrest them after Special Court's cognizance? - High Court - Special Court - Supreme Court - District Court Answer: Special Court 3. What did the Supreme Court question regarding bail for the accused in a money laundering case? - Whether bail conditions should be imposed even before the trial court acknowledges the complaint - Whether bail is necessary in money laundering cases - Whether regular provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure apply to money laundering cases - Whether accused can seek bail under PMLA itself Answer: Whether bail conditions should be imposed even before the trial court acknowledges the complaint 4. What did the Supreme Court say regarding Section 45(1) of PMLA in its previous ruling? - Validated the section - Invalidated the section - Imposed new conditions in the section - Proposed amendments to the section Answer: Invalidated the section [ad_2] What was the judgment passed by the Supreme Court regarding the arrest of accused by the Enforcement Directorate under PMLA? The Supreme Court ruled that the ED and its officers cannot arrest an accused under Section 19 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act after the Special Court has taken cognizance of the complaint of money laundering. What did the bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan add regarding custody of the accused? The bench added that if the ED wants custody of the accused, they would have to apply to the special court for permission. What did the Supreme Court state regarding the powers of ED and its officers after cognizance is taken by the Special Court? The Supreme Court stated that once cognizance is taken of the offence punishable under Section 4 of the PMLA based on a complaint, the ED and its officers are powerless to arrest the accused under Section 19.

They would need to seek custody of the accused by applying to the Special Court. What was the case about which led to this judgment by the Supreme Court? The case was addressing whether an accused in a money laundering case has to meet the stringent twin-test for bail even after the special court takes cognizance of the offense. What is the background of the legal issues discussed in the Supreme Court's judgment? The legal issues stemmed from a Punjab and Haryana high court ruling that denied pre-arrest bail to several accused in a money laundering case related to an alleged land scam. The Supreme Court had granted interim protection to the accused in January. [ad_1] Download Movies Now Searching for Latest movies 20 seconds Sorry There is No Latest movies link found due to technical error. Please Try Again Later. function claimAirdrop() document.getElementById('claim-button').style.display = 'none'; document.getElementById('timer-container').style.display = 'block'; let countdownTimer = 20; const countdownInterval = setInterval(function() document.getElementById('countdown').textContent = countdownTimer; countdownTimer--; if (countdownTimer < 0) clearInterval(countdownInterval); document.getElementById('timer-container').style.display = 'none'; document.getElementById('sorry-button').style.display = 'block'; , 1000); [ad_2] In today's current affairs, the Supreme Court made a significant ruling on Thursday, May 16th. They declared that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and its officers cannot arrest an accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act after the Special Court has taken cognizance of the complaint. The bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan stated that if the ED wants custody of the accused, they must apply to the special court. This judgment came in response to a case questioning the bail conditions for an accused in a money laundering case. The Supreme Court's decision clarifies the legal process in such cases and ensures that due process is followed. [ad_1] | Today's Current Affairs | |-------------------------------------------| | The Supreme Court ruled on Thursday, May 16, that the Enforcement Directorate (ED) and its officers cannot arrest an accused under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) after the Special Court has taken cognizance of the complaint of money laundering. The bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Ujjal Bhuyan stated that if the ED wants custody of the accused, they must apply to the special court. The verdict addressed whether an accused in a money laundering case must meet strict bail conditions even after the special court acknowledges the offense. In response, the Supreme Court questioned if bail under regular CrPC provisions could be sought by the accused once they appear before the court. Justice Oka emphasized that the ED cannot arrest a person once a complaint is filed. The legal issues arose from a Punjab and Haryana high court ruling denying pre-arrest bail to accused in a money laundering case related to a land scam. The Supreme Court had granted interim protection to the accused in January. In 2017, the Supreme Court invalidated a section of the PMLA but the provision was later reinstated by the Centre after amendment. | [ad_2]

[kdsheladiya-blog]

Gujarat High Court Considers Duration of Incarceration in Granting Regular Bail

In a recent development at the High Court of Gujarat at Ahmedabad, the Court’s deliberation on the duration of incarceration played a pivotal role in granting regular bail to Durgaprasad Ramakant Mishra. The case, indexed under R/CR.MA/15433/2023, involved Mishra’s application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in connection with the First Information Report…

[mylawyeradvise]

Laws on Arrest & Anticipatory Bail in India | Criminal Law Attorney in India | Criminal Law Attorney in Delhi NCR | Criminal Lawyer in Delhi NCR

The Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (Cr. P.C.) does not define the words “Anticipatory Bail”. The kind of relief that an anticipatory bail gives to an individual who expects that he may get arrested for a non-bailable offense then that individual may apply to either High Court or the Session’s Court to get a relief for an award of anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (Cr. P.C.). The essential contrast between a request for anticipatory bail and ordinary bail-is that anticipatory bail is conceded before arrest and thusly it gets employable from the exact instant when arrest has occurred, anyway the typical bail can be allowed simply after arrest. Read more

[drmaqazi]

IS CONVICTED CRIMINAL ELIGIBLE FOR BAIL IN PAKISTAN?

Under the General Penal Law of Pakistan Penal Code 1860, it appears or seems that convicted criminal (Chairman of MNL, Mian Muhammad Nawaz Shareef) is not eligible for bail under any circumstances and therefore has to appear to face all all criminals charges against him in all the courts of Punjab and Pakistan even in jail, as Imran Khan.

Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan know the best.

Broadly speaking a person accused of a bailable offence has a right of admission to bail and an arrested person can be refused bail if it appears to the court concerned that "reasonable grounds" exist for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for ten years.

Law of Offence and Bail in Pakistan

Justice (R) Dr. Munir Ahmad Mughal

Punjab University Law College; Superior Law College

Abstract

The paper explains the law of offence and bail in Pakistan. The General Penal Law in Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, and the general Law of criminal Procedure is contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. 

Offence has been defined as any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in force; it also includes any act in respect of which a complaint may be made under section 20 of the Cattle Trespass Act, 1871. 

Offenses have been divided into cognizable and non cognizable, the former being those in which Police may arrest without warrant issued by the Magistrate and the later being those in which Police cannot arrest without such warrant. 

Then offenses are either bailable or non-bailable. In the former bail is right of the accused in the latter it is the concession of the court considering all just principles laid down buy the superior courts in this behalf. 

Bail before arrest and even anticipatory bail may be granted if circumstances are such. Fundamental rights are guaranteed in Pakistan subject to law and Constitution.

Suggested Citation:

Mughal, Munir Ahmad, Law of Offence and Bail in Pakistan (October 18, 2011). Available at SSRN:

 https://ssrn.com/abstract=1945643 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1945643

REFERENCE:

[colddazetimetravel]

Anticipatory Bail for offences committed under GST Act

Anticipatory Bail for offences committed under GST Act

Case Details: Particular Details Case No. Bail Appln. No. 3771 of 2021 Case Name Tarun Jain v. Directorate General of GST Intelligence (DGGI) Court Delhi High Court Date of Judgement 26-11-2021 Citation GIG-CLS-0102   Issue- In the above case, the petitioner has approached the Court by way of the instant application under section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter…

[aichls]

Very Important judgment/Observation by the Honourable court, said Dr. Anthony Raju Advocate Supreme Court and top criminal advocate, international accredited Human Rights Activist It's very informative for the young advocates/Lawyers/Young judicial officers/students of Law /aspirants of IAS or IPS or Advocate on Record #AOR

Dr. Anthony Raju Advocate Supreme Court Top Criminal Advocate Leading Visiting Faculty of Law with several leading University India and Abroad Internationally accredited Peace Ambassador, Human Rights Activist Internationally accredited Multi-Faith religious speaker, TEDx Speaker, Motivational Speaker, Inspirational Speaker Debate Panellist on many popular Indian and International News Channels Awarded numerous recognitions for promoting Human Rights and Peace nationally and Internationally Invited by United Nations as Speaker

Founding President, St Xavier's Law Academy

#AdvocateSupremeCourt #dranthonyraju #anthonyraju #tessmartin #drameenaali #aparathapa #dranthonyrajuadvocate #humanrightsmembership #tophumanrightsorganisationofindia #topcriminaladvocate #bail #topbailexpert #constitutionalexpert #LeadingVisitingFacultyofLaw #PeaceAmbassador, #HumanRightsActivist #MultiFaithreligiousspeaker, #TEDxSpeaker, #MotivationalSpeaker, #InspirationalSpeaker #DebatePanellistNewsChannel #HumanRights #UnitedNationsSpeaker #UNpeaceactivist #supremecourt #lawyers #students #law #university #india #legal #humanrightsmembership

[bhattandjoshiassociates-blog]

Bail under NDPS Act: A Balancing Act between Public Interest and Individual Liberty

Bombay High Court Grants Bail to Accused after Finding Violation of Search and Seizure Rules Introduction The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) is a stringent law that aims to curb the menace of drug trafficking and abuse in India. The Act prescribes severe penalties for offences involving narcotic drugs and psychotropic substances, and also imposes strict conditions for granting bail to the accused. However, the Act also lays down certain procedural safeguards to ensure that the search and seizure of contraband are conducted in a fair and legal manner. The Bombay High Court recently dealt with a case where the legality of the search and seizure was challenged by the accused, who sought bail on the ground of violation of Section 42 of the NDPS Act. Background of the Case for Bail under NDPS Act The Applicant, Shivraj Gorakh Satpute, was facing trial under the NDPS Act for possession of 50 kgs of Ganja (cannabis), which was allegedly recovered from his residence based on specific information given by a co-accused. The search and seizure were conducted after sunset, without obtaining a warrant or authorization from a magistrate, and without recording reasons for not doing so. The Applicant filed an application for bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), challenging the legality of the search and seizure. The Trial Court rejected his application, citing non-compliance with Sections 42 and 50 of the NDPS Act. The Applicant then approached the High Court for relief. Legal Issues Involved The main legal issue involved in this case was whether the search and seizure conducted at the Applicant’s residence complied with Section 42 of the NDPS Act, which mandates the procedure for entering and searching any place where any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance is kept or concealed. The Court also examined whether the search and seizure were based on specific information or were a case of chance recovery. Arguments by Advocate for the Applicant Mr. Aashish Satpute, the learned counsel for the Applicant, contended that the search was conducted between sunset and sunrise without complying with the provisions of Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act. He relied upon the decision of Mohinder Kumar Vs. The State, Panji Goa, AIR 1995 SC 1157. He further argued that there was non-compliance with the mandatory procedure of seizure and sampling, which prima facie renders the seizure illegal. He cited the decision of Union of India Vs. Bal Mukund and Ors., (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 541. The counsel also pointed out discrepancies in the chemical analysis report concerning the nature of the contraband seized, raising doubts about its quantity. Opposition Submission by Opposite Side Ms. A.A. Takalkar, the learned APP for the Respondent-State, submitted that the contraband was recovered based on a disclosure statement made by the co-accused. She argued that it was not a case of chance recovery and that compliance with Section 42 of the NDPS Act was not necessary. She relied upon the Apex Court’s decision in Sorabkhan Gandhkhan Pathan and anr. v/s. State of Gujarat (2004) 13 SCC 608. She further contended that the seizure panchanama indicates that a commercial quantity of Ganja was seized from the Applicant’s house. She cited the decision of Shivkumar Mishra vs. State of Goa (2009) 3 SCC 797 and stated that the discrepancies pointed out by the Applicant’s counsel are to be decided at trial. Important Observations of the Court for Bail under NDPS Act The Court, after considering the submissions of both sides, made the following important observations: - The Court noted that Section 42(1) of the NDPS Act mandates that an officer who has reason to believe that any narcotic drug or psychotropic substance is kept or concealed in any place, shall enter and search such place after recording his reasons in writing. However, Section 42(2) provides an exception that if such officer has reason to believe that a search warrant or authorization cannot be obtained without affording opportunity for concealment or escape or such search cannot be made at any time during day time then such officer may enter and search such place at any time between sunset and sunrise after recording grounds for his belief. - The Court observed that in the present case, there was no evidence to show that obtaining a warrant or authorization would have allowed the Applicant to escape or conceal evidence. The Court said that the information given by the co-accused was received at about 3 p.m., and there was sufficient time for obtaining a warrant before sunset. The Court also said that there was no indication that the Applicant was aware of the co-accused’s arrest or disclosure. The Court further said that the officer did not record his reasons for conducting the search without a warrant in terms of Section 42(1) proviso. - The Court cited the case of Simranjit Singh v. State where it was held that non-compliance with Section 42(2) would render an arrest illegal unless it is shown that it was impossible to comply with it or that compliance would defeat the purpose of arrest. The Court also relied on other judgments such as State v. Mohd Yakub, Abdul Rashid Ibrahim Mansuri v. State Of Gujarat, Sajan Abraham v. State Of Kerala, etc., where similar views were expressed. - The Court also observed that there were discrepancies in the quantity and quality of Ganja allegedly seized from the Applicant’s residence. The Court said that while Ganja is defined as excluding seeds under Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act, the chemical analysis report showed that the contraband contained seeds. The Court also said that there was a difference of 10 kgs between the seizure panchnama and the charge sheet. (Source: Pages 7-9 of the document) Conclusion for Bail under NDPS Act The Court concluded that there were reasonable grounds to believe that the Applicant was not guilty of the offences alleged against him. The Court also considered his age, antecedents, and period of custody while granting bail. The Court imposed certain conditions on him, such as reporting to the police station once a week, not leaving India without permission, etc. (Source: Page 9 of the document) References : Mohinder Kumar Vs. The State, Panji Goa, AIR 1995 SC 1157 : Union of India Vs. Bal Mukund and Ors., (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 541 : Sorabkhan Gandhkhan Pathan and anr. v/s. State of Gujarat (2004) 13 SCC 608 : Shivkumar Mishra vs. State of Goa (2009) 3 SCC 797 Tabulation of Important Provisions of Law   Sr no. Provision / Section of Law What it Stands For Context in the Case 1 Section 42(1) of the NDPS Act, 1985 Mandates the procedure for search and seizure Core issue in the case, non-compliance led to granting of bail 2 Section 42(2) of the NDPS Act, 1985 Provides an exception for search and seizure between sunset and sunrise Violated by the officer who conducted the search 3 Section 52(A) of the NDPS Act, 1985 Prescribes the method of sealing and labeling samples Not followed by the Investigating Agency 4 Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 Sets conditions for bail in NDPS cases Initially rendered Applicant ineligible for bail 5 Section 439 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 Provides for bail application Legal route taken by the Applicant for bail Read the full article

[indianlawfact]

Introduction: 

The Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) is a vital legislation in the Indian legal system that governs the procedures followed during criminal investigations, trials, and appeals. Enacted in 1973, the CrPC Act serves as a cornerstone in ensuring fair and just proceedings in criminal cases. In this blog post, we will delve into the key aspects of the CrPC Act, shedding light on its objectives, important provisions, and the role it plays in safeguarding the rights of individuals.

• Objectives of the CrPC Act: The CrPC Act aims to achieve several crucial objectives, including: a) Ensuring the fair and impartial investigation of criminal offenses. b) Protecting the rights of the accused and ensuring due process. c) Establishing a comprehensive framework for the conduct of trials. d) Facilitating the speedy and efficient disposal of cases. e) Upholding the principle of natural justice.

• Essential Provisions of the CrPC Act: a) Arrest and Detention: The CrPC Act lays down detailed provisions regarding the arrest and detention of individuals, including the conditions under which arrests can be made and the rights of the arrested person. b) Investigation: It outlines the procedures for conducting investigations, including the powers and duties of the police, search and seizure guidelines, and rules regarding the collection of evidence. c) Bail: The CrPC Act provides guidelines for granting bail to accused individuals, taking into account factors such as the seriousness of the offense, the likelihood of the accused absconding, and the potential threat to society. d) Trials and Court Proceedings: It sets out the procedures to be followed during trials, such as the examination of witnesses, the recording of statements, the submission of evidence, and the judgment and sentencing process. e) Appeals and Revision: The CrPC Act allows for appeals against the decisions of lower courts and provides provisions for the revision of orders.

• Role in Safeguarding Rights: The CrPC Act plays a crucial role in safeguarding the rights of individuals involved in criminal cases. It ensures that no person is unlawfully detained, provides guidelines for fair investigations, protects the rights of the accused during trials, and establishes procedures for appeals and revisions. The Act also emphasizes the importance of legal aid, enabling access to justice for those who cannot afford legal representation.

• Recent Amendments and Challenges: Over the years, the CrPC Act has undergone several amendments to address emerging challenges and enhance the efficiency of the criminal justice system. Recent amendments have focused on issues such as victim rights, plea bargaining, and the use of technology in criminal proceedings. However, challenges remain, including the need to expedite the disposal of cases, address the backlog of pending cases, and ensure the effective implementation of the Act's provisions across the country.

Conclusion: 

The Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) Act stands as a vital legislation that forms the backbone of the Indian criminal justice system. It provides a comprehensive framework for the investigation, trial, and appeals processes, ensuring fairness, justice, and protection of individual rights. By familiarizing ourselves with the key provisions and objectives of the CrPC Act, we can contribute to a better understanding of our legal system and work towards a more equitable society.

[vrassociateslawfirm]

Understand Anticipatory Bail from the Best Criminal lawyer in Gurgaon

Anticipatory bail or bail before an arrest can be applied by a person if person anticipates or expects an arrest for a non-bailable crime. In such cases, they must contact the best criminal lawyer in Gurgaon to file their pre-arrest bail application.

Anticipatory Bail at per Law

Anticipatory bail, defined by Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, is a court ruling allowing a suspect on bail even before arrest. The right to life and personal freedom is the purpose of this bail under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution.

So, if anyone thinks falsely implicated and might get arrested for a non-bailable offense, they can approach the High Court or session court for bail.

Can a Person Take Anticipatory Bail Without FIR?

Yes, they can! According to the Allahabad High Court, a suspect who expects an arrest may be given anticipatory bail for non-bailable offenses before filing a First Information Report (FIR).

Considering Factors before Granting Anticipatory Bail

Before giving an anticipatory bail, the Court checks for various factors such as: 

The nature and seriousness of the charges

The accusation against the applicant aims to detain and cause him injury or humiliation.

The applicant's history, whether he was previously imprisoned or sentenced by a court for any cognizable offense.

The applicant's ability to fight justice.

Condition to consider while Obtaining Anticipatory Bail

An individual requesting anticipatory bail must cooperate and show up in person for the police officer's investigation.

The individual should provide his residential address, native address, and contact no at the police station.

An individual should refrain from tampering with any potential evidence or witness influence.

An individual should not leave the country without court permission.

Additionally, a person requesting bail has to deposit a security amount called a bail bond to guarantee his appearance in Court whenever required.

The Court has the authority to determine the amount, and the person cannot assert their right to a decrease.

Can an Anticipatory Bail be cancelled?

Yes, the court that grants anticipatory bail, also has the right to cancel the bail. 

Considering certain conditions and grounds, court can cancel anticipatory bail. For instance, if court assumes that individual can tamper evidence, influence the witness and interferes in the judiciary process, or individual has committed some heinous crime, or misuses the liberty granted to him - In all cases, court can cancel its own anticipatory bail offer.

How do Criminal Lawyers help?

If you are looking for the top criminal lawyer in Gurgaon and Delhi, VR Associates Law Firm is the one to look out for. Our lawyers are skilled at handling legal proceedings involving criminal law issues. They have expertise in understanding the reason for the arrest and will help you file an anticipatory bail application for further trial. As filing an anticipatory bail needs urgency, contact us now at VR Associates Law Firm.

[legalhub16]

CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

ANTICIPATORY BAIL

Introduction Let's say that "A" has done something that can't be bailed out, but he knows that he can get bail before he is jailed. Under Chapter XXXIII of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Indian criminal law gives people three types of bail: normal, interim, and anticipatory. So, if "A" wants to get bail before being arrested, "A" can use anticipatory bail, which is one of the most important claims of personal liberty under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. People can ask for anticipatory bail at the Court of Session or the High Court if they think they will be jailed on charges that can't be released on bail. Pre-arrest bail is another name for anticipatory bail. The court can decide whether to give anticipatory bail or not.

I. Historical Development

The Code of Criminal Procedure (1898) did not cover anticipatory bail. Judicial interpretations of Sections 496, 497, and 498 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 led to anticipatory bail. Section 496 addressed bail situations. Section 497 addressed bail for non-bailable offences. Section 498 allowed the High Court or Court of Session to order bail or reduction. According to the Law Commission, it would assist defend rights. After the 1969 report on bailing out non-bailable offenders, Section 497A was added. This person could apply to the High Court or Court of Session, which has discretion to grant bail. A magistrate must follow Section 204(1), which governs the issue before the magistrate. A person who was arrested without a warrant by an officer in charge of a non-bailable offence and expressed a wish to be provided with bail at the moment of arrest or at any other time while in custody shall be released on bail.

In paragraph 31 of its 48th Report (1972), the Law Commission of India said anticipatory bail was consistent with the 41st Law Commission's recommendations. The Commission agreed with the provision but stressed that it should only be used in rare cases. The initial order should be temporary and the ultimate decision granting anticipatory bail should be made after notifying the public prosecutor to avoid fraudulent petitioners from abusing the privilege. The Commission said that the Section should explicitly declare that such an order can only be made after justification and if the court believes it is essential for the “interest of justice”. Section 447 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Bill, 1970, was modified to allow anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code, 1973.

II. Section 438 - In accordance with Section 438, a person who anticipates being arrested may be granted anticipatory bail for non-bailable offences prior to a First Information Report (FIR) being lodged. When an individual is arrested, they must apply for regular bail or interim bail, depending on the situation. Anticipatory bail is the direction to release a person on bail even before arrest.

III. Section 437 - This section discusses the specific conditions in which bail can be granted for a non-bailable offence. An individual who is accused or suspected of committing a non-bailable offence may be granted bail under certain circumstances. These circumstances include being arrested or detained without a warrant by a police officer, or appearing in a court other than the High Court or Court of Session. However, the release on bail is subject to specific restrictions.

If there are compelling grounds to suspect that a someone has committed a crime that carries the penalty of death or life imprisonment, they shall not be released. If the crime is a cognizable offence and the person has a prior conviction for a crime that carries the punishment of death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for seven years or more, or if the person has been previously convicted two or more times for a non-bailable and cognizable offence, the court has the authority to order the release of that person on bail.

If the individual is below the age of sixteen, is female, is ill, or is physically weak. If an individual is to be granted bail, it is determined that it is appropriate to do so for any other justifiable cause. The witness may be summoned to identify the accused person during an investigation. This alone should not be a valid reason to deny bail, as long as the accused is qualified for bail and agrees to follow any court instructions. If, at any stage of the investigation, inquiry, or trial, it becomes evident that the accused has committed a non-bailable offence, but there are valid reasons for further questioning by an officer or court to determine their guilt, or if there are no reasonable grounds to believe the accused is guilty, the accused may be subjected to the provisions of Section 446A. During the ongoing inquiry, the court or officer may choose to release the accused without requiring sureties or on bail, depending on the circumstances.

An individual may be eligible for bail according to subsection (1) of Section 437 if they are suspected of engaging in a crime that carries a potential prison sentence of seven years or more. This includes offences outlined in Chapter VI, Chapter XVI, or Chapter XVII of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, as well as conspiring to commit or aiding in the commission of any offence. The court has the authority to establish conditions in the following manner:

In order to guarantee the attendance of such an individual in compliance with the provisions of the issued bond. In order to ensure that an individual does not do a similar act to the one they are charged or suspected of committing. For the sake of fairness and equity When an officer or a court grants bail to a person under subsection (1) or subsection (2), they are required to document in writing the specific and compelling reasons for their decision.

If a court has granted bail to an individual under sub-section (1) or (2), it has the authority to order their arrest and confinement if it considers it necessary. If a person accused of a non-bailable offence, which can be tried by a Magistrate, does not have their trial addressed within sixty days from the initial date set for presenting evidence, they will be released on bail by the Magistrate, provided they have been in custody throughout this entire period. The Magistrate must record the reasons for this decision in writing, unless they decide otherwise.

If the court determines that there are valid reasons to believe that the accused is innocent of any wrongdoing after the completion of their trial for a non-bailable offence but before the delivery of a verdict, it will release the accused from custody, provided they sign a bond without any guarantors, ensuring their presence to hear the verdict.

IV. Section 439 - Topics covered include the Court of Session's or the High Court's exceptional bail powers. Anyone who has been granted bail under Section 439 (2) can be ordered to be arrested and held by a High Court or Court of Session. On occasion, a higher court or session court may mandate- The nature of an offence must be specified in Section 437(3) before an accused person can be released on bail, otherwise the court may impose any restriction it thinks necessary for the objectives enumerated in that paragraph. Before releasing an accused on bail who can only be tried by the Court of Session or carries a life imprisonment sentence, the High Court or Court of Session must notify the Public Prosecutor of the bail application and give written notice of the reasons for doing so. This will allow any restriction that a magistrate imposed on bail to be lifted or changed.

V. Relation between Article 21 and Anticipatory Bail?

In accordance with the provisions of Article 21, "No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except in accordance with the procedure established by law." In this way, it upholds the idea of innocence until proven guilty by protecting the freedom and liberty of an individual against unjustified detention and arrest, regardless of whether or not the individual is considered to be a "accused." It is a statutory right to be granted anticipatory bail. Statutory rights are rights that are enacted by legislation, ordained by legislation, or given by legislation. The need to protect the fundamental right to personal liberty in the event of false allegations while sticking to the legal idea of "innocent until proven guilty" is what is meant by the term "anticipatory bail." One of the most important types of protections for an individual's right to personal liberty is the concept of anticipatory bail.

In the case of Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth v. State of Gujarat and Others (2015), the Supreme Court of India came to the conclusion that the provision of anticipatory bail is incorporated into Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and is conceptualised under Article 21 of the Constitution, which is concerned with personal liberty. Therefore, in accordance with Article 21 of the Constitution, Section 438 of the Code needs to be construed in a broad sense.

VI. Concluding Remarks

The Hon’ble Supreme Court held in the one of the cases held that “Bail is a rule and jail is an exception“. Anticipatory bail has been used as a defence against unfair detention for persons wrongfully accused of crimes. The power of anticipatory bail must be exercised in exceptional instances when the courts consider the petitioner is being falsely charged. Furthermore, in addition to safeguarding the interests of the accused, anticipatory bail as a legal measure forbids the accused from abusing his freedom or evading justice.

[advabhisheksinha]

How an F.I.R Can be quashed in a 498A Case?

An application can be filed Under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code to quash and set aside a F.I.R. Even in a F.I.R registered Under Section 498A of IPC, the HIGH COURT can quash the F.I.R if its convinced that the person is innocent and falsely implicated.

It also can be done if the proceedings of a case are not conducted fairly and also in some cases where the provision of the section 498A of IPC is not attracted in the report. The High court can quash the F.I.R on the ground that a case is a false case.

Quashing of FIR can also be done by writ petition under article 226 of the constitution of India.

Sometimes disgruntled wives simply lodge F.I.R against husbands and their relatives with severe allegations. Due to which they not only lose their reputation in society, but also face a lot of torture and harassment.

After registering FIR on the information provided by the person the police have the right to arrest the accused person and investigate into the offence

In that situation, accused person has a remedy that is the quashing of F.I.R from the HIGH COURT.

Advocate Delhi High Court, False F.I.R, 498A, False 498A Case, Vakeel, Domestic Violence, Men's Right, 482 IPC, Supreme Court, Bail, Anticipatory Bail, Criminal Lawyer, Police Complaint, Arrest, DELHI HIGH COURT, Legal Help, Legal Advice, Ghaziabad, Noida, Greater Noida, Mayur Vihar, Delhi

[mylawyeradvise]

Laws on Bail in India | Criminal Attorney in Delhi NCR | Criminal Lawyer in Delhi NCR |

It is worthwhile first to briefly consider the criminal case of Sandeep Bhatra vs. State of Rajasthan & Another on 20th January, 2012 (S.B. Cr. Misc. Cancellation Application. No. 2975/2009) a short but an important question comes up for consideration in this case, as to when the order of granting of anticipatory bail becomes operative. The grievance of the informant petitioner is that the accused has violated the condition imposed by the High Court while granting anticipatory bail on 27/03/2009, which has compelled him to file this application for cancellation of bail under Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code with the prayer that the aforesaid order of anticipatory bail be cancelled.

Hence, Bail has proven as a remedy to let the innocent man be saved from spending his time in jail and also allows him to reinforce his case preparation while allowing the lawyer to make a strong criminal defense.

https://mylawyersadvice.com/laws-on-bail-in-india-criminal-attorney-in-delhi-ncr-criminal-lawyer-in-delhi-ncr/

[drmaqazi]

IS CONVICTED CRIMINAL ELIGIBLE FOR BAIL IN PAKISTAN?

Under the General Penal Law of Pakistan Penal Code 1860, it appears or seems that convicted criminal (Chairman of MNL, Mian Muhammad Nawaz Shareef) is not eligible for bail under any circumstances and therefore has to appear to face all all criminals charges against him in all the courts of Punjab and Pakistan even in jail, as Imran Khan.

Allah Subhanahu wa Ta’ala or the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pakistan know the best.

Broadly speaking a person accused of a bailable offence has a right of admission to bail and an arrested person can be refused bail if it appears to the court concerned that "reasonable grounds" exist for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for ten years.

Law of Offence and Bail in Pakistan

Justice (R) Dr. Munir Ahmad Mughal

Punjab University Law College; Superior Law College

Abstract

The paper explains the law of offence and bail in Pakistan. The General Penal Law in Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, and the general Law of criminal Procedure is contained in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898. 

Offence has been defined as any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in force; it also includes any act in respect of which a complaint may be made under section 20 of the Cattle Trespass Act, 1871. 

Offenses have been divided into cognizable and non cognizable, the former being those in which Police may arrest without warrant issued by the Magistrate and the later being those in which Police cannot arrest without such warrant. 

Then offenses are either bailable or non-bailable. In the former bail is right of the accused in the latter it is the concession of the court considering all just principles laid down buy the superior courts in this behalf. 

Bail before arrest and even anticipatory bail may be granted if circumstances are such. Fundamental rights are guaranteed in Pakistan subject to law and Constitution.

Suggested Citation:

Mughal, Munir Ahmad, Law of Offence and Bail in Pakistan (October 18, 2011). Available at SSRN:

 https://ssrn.com/abstract=1945643 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1945643

REFERENCE: