Rajesh Kumar Sharma vs. C.B.I.
Held
The Court upheld the preliminary objection raised by the CBI. It held that an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable if the applicant is already arrested and in custody in connection with another criminal case, whether for similar or different offences. The Court relied on the judgment of the Rajasthan High Court in Sunil Kallani vs. State of Rajasthan, which was discussed extensively. The reasoning was that the purpose of anticipatory bail is to protect a person from arrest in anticipation of it, and once a person is already in custody, the concept of anticipatory bail becomes inapplicable. Granting anticipatory bail to an already arrested person would frustrate the purpose of the provision and could lead to a situation where investigating agencies are prevented from conducting individual investigations. The Court found that the applicant was indeed in custody in the Chandigarh case at the time of filing the application. Therefore, the application was dismissed as not maintainable.
Facts
The applicant, Rajesh Kumar Sharma, filed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in Special Case No. 01 of 2022, registered at CBI/EO-1, New Delhi, for offences including cheating and criminal conspiracy. The CBI raised a preliminary objection regarding the maintainability of the application, citing that the applicant had already been arrested in September 2022 in another case (Crime No. 33 of 2022) registered at Cyber Crime, Chandigarh, for offences under the Indian Penal Code. The applicant's counsel argued that despite being in jail in the Chandigarh case, the anticipatory bail application should be maintainable as he apprehended arrest in the present CBI case. The FIR in the CBI case was lodged on June 29, 2019, concerning fraud by M/s Naftogaz India Pvt. Ltd. A charge sheet was filed on December 31, 2021, naming the applicant as accused no. 13. The applicant also disclosed in a supplementary affidavit that he was on bail in a case registered under Sections 132(1)(b) and 132(1)(c) of the CGST Act, 2017, at the Directorate General of GST (Intelligence), Bhopal.
Key Issues
1. Whether an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is maintainable when the applicant is already arrested and in custody in connection with another criminal case (Section 438 Cr.P.C., Section 120B r/w 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988). Petitioner's contention: The applicant argued that even though he is in jail in another case, the anticipatory bail application in the present case should be maintainable as he apprehends arrest in this case as well. He contended that this would prevent the infraction of his personal liberty if multiple FIRs were registered against him. Revenue's (CBI) contention: The CBI raised a preliminary objection, arguing that an anticipatory bail application is not maintainable if the accused is already in custody in connection with another criminal case. They relied on the Rajasthan High Court's judgment in Sunil Kallani vs. State of Rajasthan.
Sections Cited
Section 438, Section 120B, Section 420, Section 467, Section 468, Section 471, Section 13(2), Section 13(1)(d), Section 132(1)(b), Section 132(1)(c)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
ORDER SAMIT GOPAL,J.
Heard Sri Alok Saxena, Sri Indra Raj, learned counsels for the applicant, Sri Gyan Prakash, learned Senior Advocate/Deputy Solicitor General of India, assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the C.B.I. and perused the record.
This anticipatory bail application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant Rajesh Kumar Sharma, seeking anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest in Special Case No. 01 of 2022, RC No. 2192019 E 006, registered at Police Station CBI/EO-1, New Delhi, under Sections 120B r/w 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and Section 13(2) r/w 13(1) (d) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.
The judgment continues below.
Read the full judgment
A free account opens 10 full GST judgments a month (one account works on both bharattax.net and this site). Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.
The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.
Reproduced from the public record of the Allahabad High Court. Verify against the court's own copy before relying on it. Income tax judgments are on bharattax.net.