Anticipatory Bail on the Ground of the Accused not Tampering with the Evidence or Manipulating the Witnesses: | Criminal Law Attorney in Delhi NCR | Criminal Lawyer in Delhi NCR |

Criminal Law Attorney in Delhi NCR | Criminal Law Attorney in Delhi | Criminal Law Attorney in Gurugram | Criminal Law Attorney in Delhi High Court | Criminal Law Attorney for Bail in Delhi NCR | Criminal Law Attorney for Bail in Delhi | Criminal Law Attorney for Bail in Delhi High Court | Criminal Law Attorney for Bail in Gurugram | Criminal Law Attorney in Saket Court | Criminal Law Attorney in Dwarka Court | Criminal Law Attorney in Gurugram Court | Criminal Law Attorney in Delhi High Court | Criminal Law Attorney in Supreme Court of India |

“The biggest reason for the rejection of the anticipatory bail application or the refusal of the application moved for anticipatory bail by the Court is the apprehension as to the accused making attempts to tamper the evidence or coerce the witness. Therefore, the accused needs to assure the Court that under no circumstance he/she shall ever make any attempt to tamper any evidence or shall make any attempt to coerce or influence any witness. The entire commitment has to be there during the entire criminal proceedings or criminal trial.”

One of the parameters that the Court keeps in mind before deciding whether to grant the bail to the accused or not is to see whether the accused would tamper with the evidence or manipulate the witnesses if granted bail. An anticipatory bail can be sought on the ground that the accused will not tamper with the evidence or manipulate the witnesses.

Grant of Anticipatory Bail on the Ground that the Accused not Tampering with the Evidence or Manipulating the Witnesses: Best Criminal Lawyer Advice
The object behind the judicial custody of accused is that the accused do not tamper with the evidence or become a threat to the witnesses. The Court considers the reasonable apprehension of tampering with the evidence or apprehension of threat to the witnesses before granting any type of bail. So, if the Court is of opinion that the accused might tamper with the evidence or manipulate the witnesses resulting in eluding the success of investigation, the Court might refuse to grant the bail but in case where the Court is of view that the accused would not try to tamper with the evidence or become threat to the witnesses, then the Court considers granting bail to the accused.

There are also cases where the accused is already granted bail and that bail is cancelled due to interference by the accused with the due course of administration of justice or abuse of relief (bail) granted to the accused. In some cases, the Court put the conditions like the accused shall not directly or indirectly threaten any witness or attempt to tamper with the evidences or in a recent case of Delhi high Court, the Court directed the accused to stay away 10KMs from the residence of witness before releasing the person on bail to make sure that the accused would not tamper with the evidences or influence the witnesses that are to be examined during the investigation by the police. The object behind this is just to make sure that the bail granted to the accused will not aid in eluding the success of investigation. In order to get the anticipatory bail granted to the accused it is important to make the Court believe that the accused would not tamper with the evidence or manipulate the witnesses and if the bail is granted to the accused, he/she would not abuse the concession (bail) granted by the Court.

Case Laws
Neeru Yadav V. State of U.P. [(2016)15 SCC 422]- In this case an application for anticipatory bail was filed by the accused, who was involved in murder case. The Hon’ble Supreme Court held that there are some factors that are to be borne in mind while considering bail application and one of them is “reasonable apprehension of tampering with witnesses by the accused or apprehension of threat to plaintiff”.

Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre V. State of Maharashtra [(2011)1 SCC 694]– The Hon’ble Supreme Court in this case enumerated factors to be kept in mind before granting the anticipatory bail. The Court to consider the reasonable apprehension of tampering with the witness or apprehension of threat to the complainant is one of them. It is also held that Section 483 of Criminal procedure Code is not extraordinary in the sense of being used in only exceptional or rare cases, Arrest should be the last option as a disgrace is connected with the arrest in the society.

It is the discretionary power of the Court to either grant the bail or refuse the bail. But, the grounds on which the bail is granted must be reasonable. The bail can be challenged in superior Court and cancelled if the grounds on which the bail is granted are not reasonable. So, the accused should make the Court believe that he/she would not tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses.
Authored By: Adv. Anant Sharma & Anjali Swami