Bail – Whether an anticipatory bail should be for a limited period of time – There are two divergent views: One are the line of Judgments in support that anticipatory bail should not be for a limited period and the others are that orders of anticipatory bail should be of a limited duration – In the light of the conflicting views of the different Benches of varying strength, following questions referred to the larger Bench: (i) Whether the protection granted to a person u/s.438 Cr.P.C. should be limited to a fixed period so as to enable the person to surrender before the trial Court and seek regular bail; (ii) Whether the life of an anticipatory bail should end at the time and stage when the accused is summoned by the Court – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.438. Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Others v. State of Punjab (1980) 2 SCC 565 : [1980] 3 SCR 383 ; Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra and Others (2011) 1 SCC 694 : [2010] 15 SCR 201 ; Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth v. State of Gujarat and Another (2016) 1 SCC 152 : [2015] 10 SCR 398 ; Salauddin Abdulsamad Shaikh v. State of Maharashtra (1996) 1 SCC 667 : [1995] 6 Suppl. SCR 556 ; K.L. Verma v. State and Another (1998) 9 SCC 348 ; Sunita Devi v. State of Bihar and Another (2005) 1 SCC 608 : [2004] 6 Suppl. SCR 707 ; Adri Dharan Das v. State of W.B. (2005) 4 SCC 303 : [ 2005] 2 SCR 188 ; Nirmal Jeet Kaur v. State of M.P. and Another (2004) 7 SCC 558 : [2004] 3 Suppl. SCR 1006 ; HDFC Bank Limited v. J.J. Mannan (2010) 1 SCC 679 : [2009] 16 SCR 590 ; Satpal Singh v. The State of Punjab (2018) SCC Online SC 415 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
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.