Supreme Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail for Absconding Accused in Bihar Witch-Hunting Case

The Supreme Court of India recently dismissed an appeal seeking anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of witch-hunting, assault, and criminal intimidation. The case, Srikant Upadhyay & Ors. vs. State of Bihar & Anr., revolved around whether an accused who has been declared absconding under Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) can still be considered for anticipatory bail.

The Court firmly held that individuals against whom non-bailable warrants are issued and proceedings under Sections 82/83 CrPC are initiated, cannot claim the extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail. The judgment emphasized the importance of respecting judicial authority and rejected the plea on the grounds that the accused had repeatedly defied court orders.

Background of the Case

The case originated from FIR No. 79 of 2020, registered at Govindganj Police Station, Bihar. The complaint, filed under Sections 341, 323, 354, 354B, 379, 504, 506, and 149 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), along with Sections 3/4 of the Prevention of Witch (Daain) Practices Act, 1999, alleged that the accused physically assaulted a woman, smeared cow dung on her, and disrobed another woman after accusing them of practicing witchcraft.

Following the investigation, the charge sheet was filed on August 8, 2022, against some of the accused. However, the trial court took cognizance of offenses against all accused and issued summons for their appearance.

Non-Appearance and Court Proceedings

Despite repeated court summons, the accused failed to appear. As a result:

April 12, 2022: The trial court issued bailable warrants against the accused.
May 25, 2022: Some co-accused appeared and secured regular bail, while the appellants remained absconding.
November 3, 2022: The court issued non-bailable warrants against the absconding accused.
January 4, 2023: A proclamation under Section 82 CrPC was issued, declaring the appellants as absconding.
March 15, 2023: The trial court initiated proceedings under Section 83 CrPC to attach the absconders’ properties.

During this period, the appellants attempted to evade arrest by filing multiple bail applications, including an anticipatory bail plea before the Patna High Court. On April 4, 2023, the High Court rejected the anticipatory bail plea, prompting an appeal before the Supreme Court.

Arguments by the Appellants

The appellants contended that:

They were not absconding but merely exercising their right to seek anticipatory bail.
The trial court should not have issued a proclamation under Section 82 CrPC while their anticipatory bail plea was pending.
The rejection of their bail application without considering it on merit was unjustified.

State’s Response

The State of Bihar opposed the anticipatory bail plea, arguing that:

The accused had repeatedly failed to appear before the trial court despite multiple summons and warrants.
The issuance of a non-bailable warrant and proclamation under Section 82 CrPC was legally justified due to their non-cooperation.
Granting anticipatory bail to absconding individuals would set a dangerous precedent.

Key Observations by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court, while rejecting the appeal, made several crucial observations:

Absconding accused cannot claim anticipatory bail: The Court reaffirmed that an individual declared as an absconder under Section 82 CrPC is not entitled to anticipatory bail.
Respect for judicial authority is paramount: The accused repeatedly failed to appear before the trial court and instead chose to file bail applications while ignoring court summons.
Power to grant anticipatory bail is exceptional: The Court reiterated that anticipatory bail should be granted only in extraordinary circumstances and not as a matter of routine.
Proclamation under Section 82 CrPC remains valid: The Court held that the pendency of an anticipatory bail application does not prevent a trial court from declaring an accused as absconding.

Final Verdict

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the High Court’s decision to deny anticipatory bail. The Court stated:

“The factual narration made hereinbefore would reveal the consistent disobedience of the appellants to comply with the orders of the trial court. Their conduct, in the light of the aforesaid circumstances, leaves us with no hesitation to hold that they are not entitled to seek the benefit of pre-arrest bail.”

Conclusion

This ruling reinforces the principle that individuals who evade legal proceedings cannot seek relief from higher courts while defying trial court orders. The judgment serves as a strong precedent for ensuring that accused persons respect judicial summons and warrants, rather than attempting to manipulate legal loopholes to avoid arrest.

Petitioner Name: Srikant Upadhyay & Ors..
Respondent Name: State of Bihar & Anr..
Judgment By: Justice C.T. Ravikumar, Justice Sanjay Kumar.
Place Of Incident: Bihar.
Judgment Date: 14-03-2024.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: srikant-upadhyay-&-o-vs-state-of-bihar-&-anr-supreme-court-of-india-judgment-dated-14-03-2024.pdf

Directly Download Judgment: Directly download this Judgment

See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Judgment by C.T. Ravikumar
See all petitions in Judgment by Sanjay Kumar
See all petitions in dismissed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments March 2024
See all petitions in 2024 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category