The Supreme Court has recently held that participation in the investigation does not entail making self-incriminating statements. The Court made the observation while directing the accused to cooperate with the investigating officer, as a condition for granting anticipatory bail.

The Court made the observation in a case which revolved around allegations that the petitioner had inflated costs for the construction of a 'green building' for the Municipal Corporation, Sonepat, Haryana. The Punjab and Haryana High Court had previously rejected his plea for Anticipatory Bail on December 5, after which the petitioner filed an Appeal before the Apex Court.

The Bench of Justice Aniruddha Bose and Justice Sanjay Kumar in its order remarked, "We, accordingly, set aside the order of the High Court by which the pre-arrest bail to the appellant was denied and direct that in the event of arrest of the appellant in connection with FIR No.0354/2022 dated 22.06.2022 registered with Police Station Faridabad Kotwali, District Faridabad, Haryana, he shall be released on bail on such conditions the Trial Court may impose."

On perusal of the materials disclosed, the Bench opined that custodial interrogation of the appellant is not necessary for the purpose of the ongoing investigation."There is no aggravating factor either, that would justify the detention of the appellant at the investigation stage," it noted.

The State argued that the appellant was not cooperating with the investigation.

"But in response to our query about the nature of such non-cooperation, it was submitted on behalf of the State that the appellant as an accused was not helping out for recovery of the sum allegedly paid to him as a bribe. In our opinion, however, participation in the investigation does not entail making self-incriminating statements, which seems to be the reason for which the State wants him in custody, " the Bench held.

The Court also directed the accused to continue cooperating with the investigating officer during the course of investigation. "We further direct that the appellant shall continue to cooperate with the investigating officer during the period of investigation. The appeal stands allowed in the above terms," it directed.

Accordingly, the Court ordered, "The appeal is allowed, and the appellant is granted anticipatory bail in terms of the signed order, which is placed on the file."

Cause Title: Hemant Kumar v. State of Haryana [Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s). 232/2024]

Appearance:

Petitioner: Senior Advocate S.R.Singh, AoR Ankur Yadav, Advocates Sushant Kumar Yadav, Ajay Yadav, Prateek Yadav, Mangal Prasad, Gaurav Lomes, Prithvi Yadav, Swapnil Singh, Anurag Singh, Dhroov Kumar Singh

Respondent: Additional Advocate General Dr. Hemant Gupta, AOR Akshay Amritanshu, Advocates Samyak Jain, Shivang Jain, Ayush Raj, Monica Anand Kumar, Payal Gupta

Click here to read/download Order



Justice Aniruddha BoseJustice Sanjay Kumar

Sukriti Mishra