Anticipatory Bail Application Is Maintainable Even After Issuance Of Notice U/s. 41A CrPC: Andhra Pradesh High Court
The Andhra Pradesh High Court granted anticipatory bail and observed that the application is maintainable even after the issuance of notice for appearance under Section 41A Code of Criminal Procedure.
The Bench of Justice T Mallikarjuna Rao observed, “In light of the above decision relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner, this court views that there is apprehension of arrest exists, even after issuance of notice of appearance it cannot be said that anticipatory bail is not maintainable”
Advocate Umesh Chandra PVG appeared for the Petitioner and Public Prosecutor appeared for the Respondent.
The Court relied on the decision reported in Sri Ramappa@Ramesh S/o Dharmanna v. State of Karnataka wherein it was held, “Section 41A of the Cr.P.C. defers the arrest until and unless sufficient evidence is collected, so as to produce or forward the accused to the custody of the court. The apprehension of arrest, thus, does not completely vanish away on the issuance of notice of appearance under Section 41A of the Cr.P.C., and hence, the question being raised in maintainability of an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C., during the pendency of notice being issued under Section 41A Cr.P.C. or during the compliance of the terms of such notice, is completely unwarranted and is not in tune with the provisions of law. The apprehension of arrest always does exist even after issuance of notice of appearance under Section 41A Cr.P.C. and under such circumstance the Courts cannot evade to entertain an application under Section 438 Cr.P.C..”
The Accused filed the present petition in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 469, 471 and 509 Indian Penal Code and Section 66-D IT Act, 2000 in which it was alleged that he posted explicit and defamatory content about two women in filthy language. The police officer had issued a notice under Section 41A of the CrPC and the Accused could not appear before the officer under the apprehension of arrest.
Accordingly, the Court allowed granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner on certain conditions.
Cause Title: Pinapala Uday Bhushan v. The State of Andhra Pradesh
Appearances:
Petitioner: Advocate Umesh Chandra PVG
Respondents: Public Prosecutor
