LegalFirms.in
LegalFirms.in Judgments · legalfirms.in/judgments/devinder-kumar-bansal-vs-the-state-of-punjab-20250303/ · Printed 07 Nov 2026
Criminal · Reportable judgment

Devinder Kumar Bansal vs The State of Punjab

Court
Supreme Court of India
Date
3 March 2025
Case No.
SLP (Crl.) No. 3247 of 2025
Result
Dismissed
Bench
J.B. Pardiwala, R Mahadevan
Citation
[2025] 3 S.C.R. 1531 : 2025 INSC 320
Acts & Sections
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 IPC Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947
Supreme Court Reports [2025] 3 S.C.R. 1531 : 2025 INSC 320
Issue for consideration
Issue arose whether the High Court justified in denying anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with FIR registered against the petitioner for the offence punishable u/s.7 of the 1988 Act and s.61(2) of the BNS 2023.
Headnote

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – s.61(2) – Illegal gratification – Anticipatory bail – Denial – Petitioner-Audit Inspector with the Government demanded illegal gratification in connection with conducting of audit during the tenure of complainant’s wife as Sarpanch of Gram Panchayat – Co-accused actually collected the bribe amount for and on behalf of the petitioner from the complainant – FIR registered against the petitioner for the offence punishable u/s.7 of the 1988 Act and s.61(2) of the BNS 2023 – Application for anticipatory bail by the petitioner – High Court denied the bail – Correctness:

Held: High Court rightly denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner – Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail in a serious offence like corruption are required to be satisfied – Anticipatory bail can be granted only in exceptional circumstances where the Court is prima facie of the view that the applicant has been falsely enroped in the crime or the allegations are politically motivated or are frivolous – In the instant case, it cannot be said that any exceptional circumstances have been made out by the petitioner for grant of anticipatory bail and there is no frivolity in the prosecution – Presumption of innocence, by itself, cannot be the sole consideration for grant of anticipatory bail – Presumption of innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for anticipatory bail – Salutary rule is to balance the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice – Over solicitous homage to the accused’s liberty can, sometimes, defeat the cause of public justice – If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free society, then the courts should not hesitate in denying such liberty – Where overwhelming considerations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. [Paras 21, 23, 24, 32]

Keywords: Illegal gratification · Anticipatory bail · Audit Inspector with the Government · Conducting of audit · Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat · Bribe amount · Parameters for grant of anticipatory bail · Corruption · Frivolity · Presumption of innocence · Public justice · Over solicitous homage

As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Headnotes prepared by: Nidhi Jain. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.

Full Judgment Text

Order 1. Exemption Applications are allowed. 2. The High Court has denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner in connection with First Information Report No. l dated 08.01.2025 registered with the Vigilance Bureau, Police Station, Patiala for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and Section 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023. 3. It appears from the materials on record that the petitioner – herein is serving as Audit Inspector with the Government. 4. He is alleged to have demanded illegal gratification in connection with conducting of audi
Full text available to subscribers
Subscribe to access complete judgment text, daily digests, and AI-powered legal research tools. For informational and research purposes only.
View Subscription Plans →
Annual plans from ₹1,599 + GST.

This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.

All SC judgments →