Exclusive HOLI Discounts!
Get Courses and Combos at Upto 50% OFF!
Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

KEY TAKEAWAYS

  • The Supreme Court was hearing a submission on a blanket ban on coercive steps granted by the High courts under section 482 of Cr.PC.
  • It was noticed that the high courts grant interim relief which operates to restrain the investigating officer not only from recording evidences but also from proceeding with the investigation in addition to arresting the accused.
  • The bench was concerned with the rising trend amongst high courts to consistently grant interim reliefs by way of stay under section 482 of Cr.PC for quashing of criminal proceedings.
  • Thus, in this behalf the bench laid down the guidelines.

BACKGROUND DETAILS

  • The bench was hearing a SLP against an order of the Bombay high court on a writ petition.
  • While the high court granted time to file a reply, it also directed in the interim order that no coercive steps to be taken against the respondents.
  • An ad- interim stay was granted on the directions of the high court and issued a notice on the SLP by a bench headed by Justice Chandrachud.
  • It was recorded by the court that the Sessions Court in Mumbai extended the time period of protection from time – to - time till 1 year and later a writ petition was filed before the Bombay High Court which passed a blanket order.

FURTHER DETAILS

  • The bench comprising of Justice Chandrachud, Justice M.R Shah, Justice Sanjiv Khanna were considering matters relating to the power to grant interim relief by way of bail or anticipatory bail, stay on arrest and investigation.
  • Following are the remarks and observations made by the following judges :

1. Justice Chandrachud remarked that

  • “status quo is the worst order to be passed".
  • He also accepted the fact that there can be genuine cases wherein the accused might need protection from harassment.
  • He also said that he even gives reasons while issuing a notice and this practice should be adopted by all courts including the Supreme Court as this shall helps all, as a notice is practically a stay.

2. Justice Khanna observed that

  • when high courts say that no coercive steps to be taken, by such an order it itself hampers the interrogation as this would mean that no interrogation should take place.
  • The right to investigate and the discretion to arrest lies with the investigating officer and not with the courts.

3. Justice Shah observed that

  • There is no time given to the investigating officer as within 1 day of lodging of the F.I.R , the order for quashing it is sought.
  • He agreed the reasoning is important as it helps not just lawyers but also the higher courts.

CONCLUSION

The bench said that at least the high courts should write one paragraph to explain the reasons for granting interim relief at the ad- interim stage. Also it cautioned that this power should be exercised responsibly as it is a wide power. The Hon’ble Court also cleared that they aren’t asking for any detailed explanations but an explanation sufficient enough to point out that it makes out a special case or an extraordinary case to grant interim reliefs. This would also show that there was application of mind by the judges.

"Loved reading this piece by JINALI SHAH?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"




Tags :

  Views  53  Report



Comments
img