High Court: Can’t dismiss pre-arrest bail plea filed by accused for want of prosecution

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, December 4

In a significant judgment, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that an anticipatory bail application filed by an accused in a case cannot be dismissed by the court below for the want of prosecution or failure to pursue the matter.

The observation

Advertisement

This court is shocked to see that, vide order dated October 31, the application filed by the petitioner seeking pre-arrest bail has been dismissed for want of prosecution. In the considered opinion of the court, the dismissal of pre-arrest bail, that too for want of prosecution, is totally alien to the procedure in law. Justice Pankaj Jain

Justice Pankaj Jain of the high court expressed “shock” over the dismissal of a pre-arrest bail application by a Bathinda court for want of prosecution. The Bench made it clear that the application’s dismissal for the reason was procedurally irregular. The assertion came as the court promptly set aside the order.

The ruling by Justice Jain came on a petition filed by Raman against the state of Punjab and other respondents. The petitioner had moved court apprehending arrest in an FIR registered on May 27, 2021, for murder and other offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 325, 324, 323, 427, 149 of the Indian Penal Code at the Sadar police station of Rampura in Bathinda district.

“Dismissal for want of prosecution” is a phrase often used in civil cases where there has been no activity. The failure of a litigant to pursue the case in a timely manner can sometimes result in its dismissal.

As the petition for pre-arrest bail came up for hearing before Justice Jain, the counsel for the petitioner submitted before the Bench that the petitioner had approached Bathinda Sessions Court before moving high court.

“This court is shocked to see that, vide order dated October 31, the application filed by the petitioner seeking pre-arrest bail has been dismissed for want of prosecution. In the considered opinion of this court, the dismissal of pre-arrest bail, that too for want of prosecution, is totally alien to the procedure in law,” Justice Jain said.

Setting aside the order dated October 31, Justice Jain remanded the matter back to the court concerned for fresh adjudication. The Sessions Court was also directed to decide the application filed by the petitioner seeking pre-arrest bail in three days’ time.

The petitioner was also asked to appear through his counsel before the Sessions Court on the date fixed before disposing of the petition.