Legal provisions involved: Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 of BNSS), Section 438 CrPC (anticipatory bail) (Now Section 482 of BNSS), Section 173 CrPC (now Section 193 of BNSS), Article 226 of the Constitution of India.

Judgement by: Supreme Court

Judge/Bench: Justice Vikram Nath and Justice Sandeep Mehta

Facts

The complainant challenged the Allahabad High Court’s orders because the court refused to cancel the FIR but still gave the accused full protection from arrest until the charge sheet was filed, even though the investigation was allowed to continue.

Key legal provisions

Section 482 CrPC (now Section 528 of BNSS), Section 438 CrPC (anticipatory bail) (Now Section 482 of BNSS), Section 173 CrPC (now Section 193 of BNSS), Article 226 of the Constitution of India

Issues raised

Whether a High Court can protect an accused from arrest while at the same time refusing to cancel the FIR, and whether such protection affects the fairness of the investigation?

Argument to the case

The complainant argued that giving blanket protection from arrest was illegal and weakened the investigation. The accused argued that the protection was needed to protect their personal liberty.

Judgement 

The Supreme Court cancelled the High Court’s orders and ruled that the accused must first apply for pre-arrest bail before the Sessions Court. It held that High Courts cannot give “no arrest” protection when they refuse to quash an FIR. The case was sent back to the High Court for fresh hearing, while temporary protection was allowed to continue.

Click here to VIEW the full judgement.