Ensure speedy disposal of pending anticipatory bail pleas with interim 'not-to-arrest orders': Kerala HC to Registrar
Kerala High Court
Noting that accused in serious cases, including rape and attempt to murder often evade arrest for several years by taking advantage of interim "not-to-arrest orders" passed by the court, the Kerala High Court has asked the Registrar (Judicial) to ensure speedy disposal of such pleas.
Kochi: Noting that accused in serious cases, including rape and attempt to murder often evade arrest for several years by taking advantage of interim "not-to-arrest orders" passed by the court, the Kerala High Court has asked the Registrar (Judicial) to ensure speedy disposal of such pleas.
The Court made the observation after coming across hundreds of cases where an accused, who has moved an anticipatory bail application before the court, procures an interim order protecting him from arrest and then avoid arrest, sometimes for several years.
"In the interest of justice and to safeguard the criminal justice delivery system, I am inclined to mention certain instances of similar nature, in hundreds of cases, which I came across, where after filing anticipatory bail applications starting from the year 2020 onwards and on getting interim protection ‘not to arrest’ the bail applicants avoided arrest in many cases where very serious offences are alleged to be committed by the bail applicants including offences under Section 376, 307, 326, 406, 409, 395, 420 of the IPC etc., (the list of offences is not exhaustive)," said Justice Badharudeen.
The court further pointed out that since custodial interrogation cannot be conducted when a "not-to-arrest" order is in operation, the investigation into such cases gets hampered.
"It is disgusting to note that in view of the interim order passed by this court 'not to arrest', the hands of the Investigating Officer have been chained," the Court said.
The Court further said that it was appalling that even in rape cases, the medical examination of the accused, which is absolutely necessary, is not done due to such "not-to-arrest" orders.
As a result, the final report in such cases have to be filed without this crucial evidence, the judge observed.
"Invariably the ultimatum of such investigation results in acquittal of the accused for want of evidence and the said practice should be avoided to save the system intact," the Court opined.
Pointing out the directions of the Supreme Court on the need for time-bound disposal of bail applications, the Court reiterated that anticipatory bail applications should ordinarily be disposed of within two-three weeks or within a period of six weeks.
