REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.            OF 2009 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.4992 of 2006)

Shree Baidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Pvt. Ltd. … Appellant

Versus

State of Punjab & Ors. … Respondents

J U D G M E N T

S.B. Sinha, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. Appellant-ShreeBaidyanath Ayurved Bhawan Pvt. Ltd. (for short, ‘the  

Company) is a company registered under the Indian Companies Act, 1956.  

It appointed M/s. S. Bhatia Enterprises, Ludhiana (for short, ‘the firm’) as its  

Carrying and Forwarding Agent under a contract.  The company through its  

General Manager, Y.P. Sharma, lodged a First Information Report before the

PS  Kotwali,  Jhansi  on  or  about  2.11.2001.   The  case  was  ultimately  

transferred to the Court of CJM Chandigarh by this Court by an order dated  

24.2.2003.

3. The respondents herein filed an application for grant of anticipatory  

bail.  By reason of an order dated 25.2.2005 the High Court, while granting  

anticipatory bail for one month asked the respondents to approach the Court  

of CJM to seek for regular bail.  Respondents filed an application seeking  

correction of a typographical error in the order dated 25.2.2005 which was  

allowed by reason of an order dated 24.3.2005.

The  respondents  instead  of  appearing  before  the  Chief  Judicial  

Magistrate,  filed  an  application  for  regular  bail  before  the  Additional  

Sessions  Judge,  Chandigarh.   The learned Additional  Sessions Judge,  by  

order  dated  19.4.2005  directed  them to  appear  before  the  Chief  Judicial  

Magistrate.

4. The respondents filed an application for regular bail before the High  

Court.   They  also  sought  for  stay  of  execution  of  non-bailable  warrants  

against them.  Both the applications were dismissed by the High Court vide  

its order dated 19.8.2005.   

2

Respondents filed an application seeking extension of time for grant  

of pre-arrest bail.  Notice was issued in the said application.

5. On or about 6.12.2005, non-bailable arrest warrant was issued against  

the  respondents  on  their  failure  to  appear  before  learned  Chief  Judicial  

Magistrate.

6. Respondents filed an application for stay of the non-bailable warrant  

of  arrest.   Notice  was  issued  in  the  said  application.   Thereafter,  the  

respondents  filed  another  application  before  the  High  Court,  inter  alia,  

praying for grant of pre-arrest bail and sought for stay of the said order dated  

6.12.2005.

Another application was filed by the respondents seeking bail.  The  

High  Court  vide  an  ex  parte  order  dated  27.12.2005  directed  that  the  

respondent may be released on bail  on their  appearance before the Chief  

Judicial Magistrate.  Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate granted them bail on  

or about 2.1.2006.  The said order has not been brought on record.

7. On or about 5.1.2006, the Investigating Officer filed his objections  

before the High Court of Chandigarh questioning the validity of the ex parte  

order granting bail to the respondents.   

3

8. Appellant  filed  an  application  before  the  High  Court  on  9.1.2006  

praying for vacation of the ex parte interim order.

9. On 28.4.2006, counsel for the accused withdrew all the petitions filed  

by them stating that since all the accused have furnished regular bail bonds  

in the High Court of Chandigarh pursuant to order dated 27.12.2005, the  

accused need not press the pending petitions.  The High Court by reason of  

the impugned judgment dismissed the application for cancellation of interim  

order dated 27.12.2005.

10. The appellant is, thus, before us.  

11. For the purpose of grant of anticipatory bail, the Court of Sessions or  

the High Court must take into consideration the ingredients therefor as laid  

down in Section 438 of the Code of Criminal  Procedure.   Ordinarily,  an  

order  granting  anticipatory  bail  should  not  be  for  an  indefinite  period,  

particularly when the FIR had been in a police station of another State.   

The High Court, in our opinion, thus, committed a serious error in  

passing an ex parte interim order on 27.12.2005 directing the Chief Judicial  

Magistrate, Chandigarh to release the respondents on bail.  The High Court  

should not have passed the said order which for all intent and purport was a  

4

final one at that stage.  Respondents evidently took undue advantage of the  

said  ex parte  interim order.   When such an order  was  passed,  the  Chief  

Judicial Magistrate had no other option but to grant them bail.  The High  

Court, therefore, committed a manifest error in allowing the respondents not  

to press their  application.   The High Court  ought to have considered the  

effect thereof, namely, the interim order has thereby been made a final order  

which is impermissible in law.

12. An interim order is always passed subject to the final order.  Before a  

final order granting anticipatory bail is passed, the High Court was required  

to apply its mind not only with regard to the stage in which the investigation  

was pending but several other factors including the conduct of the accused.   

13. We, therefore, are of the opinion that the impugned order cannot be  

sustained.   The appeal  is  allowed and the matter  is  remitted to the High  

Court  for  consideration  of  the  appellant’s  application  for  cancellation  of  

interim bail  as also the respondents’  application  for grant  of  anticipatory  

bail.

14. For the aforementioned purpose, the order dated 28.4.2006 permitting  

the respondents not to press their applications is also set aside.  The High  

Court must consider the matter afresh and upon hearing the parties and upon  

5

taking into consideration all other relevant factors dispose of the matter as  

expeditiously as possible and preferably within a period of four weeks from  

the date of communication of this order.

..…………………………..…J.  [S.B. Sinha]

..…………………………..…J.  [Cyriac Joseph]

New Delhi; August 4, 2009

6