Priyanka Singh
Published on: October 3, 2022 at 19:42 IST
In a 2020 case, the Punjab and Haryana High Court held that the residence of an accused being abroad cannot be a ground for denial of anticipatory bail to him.
This was held while hearing a petition filed under Section 438 CrPC (grant of anticipatory bail) for the petitioner in an FIR registered under Section 306 IPC (abetment of suicide).
The Petitioner, the mother-in-law of the deceased man, had allegedly made monetary demands made to him, leading to him committing a suicide.
The petitioner, in February 2020, allegedly left for Canada therefore, no FIR has been registered yet against her.
As mentioned in the petition, the suicide note was produced 15 days post the incident which makes it subject to doubt, also notifying the court of no proceeding being carried out by the police even after two years of the incident.
The petition relied on the Gujarat High Court’s judgment in the Hiteshkumar Vadilal Shah & 1 vs. State of Gujarat, which held that there is no bar for a person residing outside the country to file for an anticipatory bail and that, a reasonable apprehension of arrest is the only requirement for filing for an anticipatory bail.
Thus, with the above contended scenarios, the court allowed the plea for an anticipatory bail and directed the petitioner’s release on interim bail to the Arresting Officer during the event of arrest, conditional to Section 438(2) CrPC.
Nevertheless, the Court also directed the vacancy of the interim order in case the petitioner doesn’t cooperate with the Investigating Agency.