Case Title: M/s Neeharika Infrastructure Pvt. Ltd. v. State of Maharashtra
The Supreme Court held that when dismissing or disposing of a quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C and/or Article 226 of the Indian Constitution, the High Court shall not pass an order of not to arrest and/or "no coercive steps" either during the investigation or until the investigation is completed and/or until the final report/charge-sheet is filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C.
The bench of Justices DY Chandrachud, MR Shah, and Sanjiv Khanna observed that while the investigation is ongoing and the facts are foggy, and the complete evidence/material is not before the High Court, the High Court should refrain from giving the interim direction of not to arrest or "no coercive steps to be adopted," and the accused should be entitled to petition for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. before the competent court. The court further added:
"We caution the High Courts again against passing such orders of not to arrest or "no coercive steps to be taken" till the investigation is completed and the final report is filed, while not entertaining quashing petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or Article 226 of the Constitution of India".
The court issued the guidelines outlining when and where the High Court would be justified in granting an interim order either delaying the further investigation in the FIR/complaint or interim order in the type of "no coercive steps" and/or not arresting the accused either pending inquiry by the police/investigating agency or during the pendency of the quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or under Article 226 of the Constitution of India.
The court remarked that many interim orders of stay of arrest and/or "no coercive steps to be taken against the accused" were issued by High Courts in quashing proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and/or Article 226 of the Indian Constitution without stating any reasons. The court stated that in the matter of State of Telangana v. Habib Abdullah Jeelani, the Supreme Court had condemned similar High Court judgments instructing police not to arrest while failing to intervene in the quashing petition in the exercise of powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C.
"We are at pains to note that despite the law laid down by this Court in the case of Habib Abdullah Jeelani (supra), deprecating such orders passed by the High Courts of not to arrest during the pendency of the investigation, even when the quashing petitions under Section 482 Cr.P.C. or Article 226 of the Constitution of India are dismissed, even thereafter also, many High Courts are passing such orders. The law declared/laid down by this Court is binding on all the High Courts and not following the law laid down by this Court would have very serious implications in the administration of justice," the bench observed.