http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 1 of 2  

PETITIONER: SAMUNDER SINGH

       Vs.

RESPONDENT: STATE OF RAJASTHAN & OTHERS

DATE OF JUDGMENT12/01/1987

BENCH: THAKKAR, M.P. (J) BENCH: THAKKAR, M.P. (J) RAY, B.C. (J)

CITATION:  1987 AIR  737            1987 SCR  (1) 979  1987 SCC  (1) 466        JT 1987 (1)   141  1987 SCALE  (1)66

ACT:     Code  of Criminal Procedure,  1973:  s.438--Anticipatory bail--When not to be granted.

HEADNOTE:     While  the matter regarding the unnatural death  of  the daughter in-law at the house of her father-in-law was  still under investigation the High Court grunted anticipatory bail to the accused in disregard of the magnitude and seriousness of the matter.     Subsequent to the filing of the appeal by special  leave by  the  father of the deceased the investigation  had  been concluded  by the police and challan filed, and the  accused were released on bail by the Chief Judicial Magistrate. Dismissing the appeal as infructuous, the Court,     HELD: The High Court was under no compulsion to exercise its  jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail in a matter  of this nature. [980D]     The  appropriate course to adopt was to allow  the  con- cerned Magistrate to deal with the case on the basis of  the material before him at the point of time of accused’s arrest in  case  they  were arrested. It  was,  therefore,  neither prudent nor proper for the High Court to have granted antic- ipatory bail which order was very likely to occasion  preju- dice by its very nature and timing. [980B-D]

JUDGMENT:     CRIMINAL    APPELLATE   JURISDICTION:   Criminal  Appeal No. 22 of 1987.     From  the  Judgment and Order dated  29.10.1986  of  the Rajasthan High Court in Crl. M.B.A. No. 1395/86     Gopal  Subramaniam, A.M. Garg and R.  Venkataramani  for the Petitioner. Dalveer Bhandari for the Respondents. 980 The Judgment of the Court was delivered by     THAKKAR, J. The widespread belief that dowry deaths  are even now treated with some casualness at all levels seems to be  well grounded. The High Court has  granted  anticipatory

http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIA Page 2 of 2  

bail  in such a matter. We are of the opinion that the  High Court should not have exercised its jurisdiction to  release the accused on anticipatory bail in disregard of the  magni- tude and seriousness of the matter. The matter regarding the unnatural  death of the daughter-in-law at the house of  her father-in-law  was still under investigation and the  appro- priate course to adopt was to allow the concerned Magistrate to  deal with the same on the basis of the  material  before the Court at the point of time of their arrest in case  they were  arrested.  It was neither prudent nor proper  for  the High Court to have granted anticipatory bail which order was very  likely  to occasion prejudice by its very  nature  and timing. We therefore consider it essential to sound a  seri- ous  note of caution for future. The High Court is under  no compulsion to exercise its jurisdiction to grant anticipato- ry  bail in a matter of this nature. So far as  the  present matter is concerned, since it has become infructuous, we  do not  propose  to pass any order. Subject to  these  observa- tions, the appeal is dismissed. P.S.S.                                                Appeal dismissed. 981