Anticipatory Bail on the Ground of Relevancy of Evidences Available
Anticipatory bail can be sought on the ground that there is no evidence available against the accused and the case is of frivolous nature. The allegations against the accused are made on baseless grounds and there is nothing to prove that the offence is committed by the accused.
Grant of Anticipatory Bail on the Ground of Relevancy of Evidences Available-Direct and Indirect
A Crime can be categorized into ‘white collar crimes’ and ‘blue collar crimes.’ If a person is accused of White-collar crime and the accused is seeking for anticipatory bail then, the ground on which the bail can be granted is that no evidences are available against the accused. Generally, the while collar crime includes economic offences. In economic offences, Financial Transactions and Books of Account are very relevant and can be used as evidences against the accused. If there are no fault in Books of Account and no irregularities are shown in Financial Transactions, then it can be a relevant ground for seeking anticipatory bail for the accused. In the situation where the investigation is completed and charge sheet is also submitted, then also the accused can argue for anticipatory bail as the accused cannot tamper with the evidence when they are already submitted in the Court. The Court consider granting bail to the accused if there are no evidence are available against the accused.
In case of Blue-collar crimes, which means crime against the body for example murder, assault etc, the evidences available against the accused can be the medical reports of the complainant or victim. In that case if there are no evidences available- direct or indirect, the accused can take that as ground for seeking anticipatory bail arguing that the allegations made against the accused are false and on baseless grounds as there are no evidence available against the accused to back up the allegations against the accused in the alleged offence. Thus, pre-arrest bail can be sought on the ground that the allegations made against the accused are not genuine and made on baseless grounds as there is no evidence available against the accused.
Prahlad Singh Bhati V. N.C.T. of Delhi [(2001) 4 SCC 280]- In this case hon’ble Supreme Court that the words used by legislature are “reasonable grounds for believe” instead of “the evidences”, which means while dealing with the matters of anticipatory bail application, the Court just have to satisfy whether the case is genuine or not and the prosecution would be able to produce prima-facie evidence in support of charge. It is not expected to have evidence available against the accused beyond reasonable doubt and then consider whether to grant bail to the accused or not on the basis of that evidence.
Sanjay Chandra v. CBI [(2012) 1 SCC 40]– In this case the accused was charged with economic offence that was of high magnitude and affected public at charge. The accused filed for anticipatory bail and the Court was conscious of the fact that the offence is affecting public at large and of huge magnitude. But the Court did not ignore the fact that the chargesheet is already filed and investigation is also already completed, so there is no possibility of the accused interfering with due course of justice. On this basis, the Court granted bail to the accused on some conditions.
It can be concluded that challenging the genuineness of prosecution and proving the allegations to be made on baseless grounds without any evidence is favourable to the accused and the Court might consider granting pre-arrest bail to the accused on this ground.
Authored By: Adv. Anant Sharma & Anjali Swami