The Supreme Court has ruled that courts cannot give a blanket protection to an accused in the name of granting anticipatory bail as it would amount to providing a passport for indulging in criminal activities.
“A ‘blanket’ order of bail may amount to or result in an invitation to commit an offence or a passport to carry on criminal activities or to afford a shield against any and all types of illegal operations, which, in our judgement, can never be allowed in a society governed by the Rule of Law,”, the apex court has said in a judgement.
The apex court passed the ruling while upholding an appeal filed by the Union Government challenging the directions passed by the Rajasthan High Court wherein the latter had ruled that Padam Narain Aggarwal, an export allegedly involved in a customs fraud, shall be arrested only after giving him 10 days’ notice.
Aggarwal was sought to be questioned by the Customs authorities for allegedly defrauding the government to the tune of Rs 75 lakh by indulging in bogus export transaction and claiming exemptions for the same.
Aggarwal filed an anticipatory bail in the sessions court which dismissed it but he later moved the high court which granted him anticipatory bail with a direction to the authorities that he shall not be arrested without giving a 10 days’ notice to him.
In the SLP filed before the apex court, the Centre argued that the High Court order was illegal and erroneous.
The Union Government submitted that once the High Court held that the accused was merely summoned under Section 108 of the Act to give statements in the inquiry, the anticipatory bail applications was premature and no further direction could have been issued by putting fetters on his arrest.