In SLP (Crl.) No. 295 of 2023, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s decision to grant anticipatory bail to Respondent No. 1, as the CBI failed to provide sufficient evidence to prove the need for his arrest. The court cited Dolat Ram v. State of Haryana and outlined the circumstances that justify the cancellation of bail. No supervening circumstances were pointed out for the cancellation of bail by the CBI or complainant. The court summarized the parameters that can be considered while dealing with anticipatory bail, including the nature and gravity of the accusation, antecedents of the applicant, and the possibility of fleeing from justice.

The court also observed that cancellation of bail required “cogent and overwhelming” reasons, such as interference with the administration of justice, evasion of justice, or abuse of the concession granted to the accused. The court emphasized that bail should not be cancelled in a mechanical manner without considering supervening circumstances.

Central Bureau of Investigation … Appellant
VERSUS
Santosh Karnani & Anr.
… Respondents decided by the Supreme Court of India on 17.04.23

By aor.sanjivnarang@gmail.com

Sanjiv Narang Adv. is an Advocate on Record in the Supreme Court of India. His qualifications include an LLB from University of Delhi and a Masters degree in Personnel Management from Panjab University,Chandigarh.In his more than 3 decades of experience, he has practiced law at the District, High Court and Supreme Court levels.He also has more than a decade of experience in the field of Management. He is the author of two books namely Laws for Women in India and Innovation, Why What and How.