Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned HCGP for the respondent-State. Perused the records.
2. Petitioners have approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail though there is no case pending against them or no case has been registered against them by the respondent-Police. On mere apprehension that the police may register a case against them for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506B, 420, 120B read with Section 34 of IPC, they sought a direction to be issued to the police to release them on bail in such an eventuality.
3. On careful perusal of the entire averments made in the petition, there is no reference regarding happening of any incident and in that context, any person may register any case against the petitioners and the police may arrest them in that connection. Unless, the Court examine and satisfy itself, whether there is any reasonable apprehension of arrest in connection with any incident, attracting the said provisions that the offence alleged are for the purpose of falsely implicating the petitioners, in such cases, Court can grant anticipatory bail under Section 438 of Cr.P.C., though no case is registered against them. Such ingredients are not available in the present case. Therefore, mere apprehension is not sufficient and such apprehension should satisfy by producing materials on record. In the absence of that, if any bail order is granted that will lead to unnecessary complications in future and virtually amounts to blanket order of bail. Under these circumstances, the petitioners have not made out any case for grant of bail. Hence, the petition is liable to be dismissed and accordingly, dismissed. Sd/- JUDGE
Comments