RAVI Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner apprehending arrest in the FIR captioned above has come up before this Court under Sec. 438 CrPC seeking anticipatory bail.

(2.) In paragraph 7 of the bail petition, the accused declares that he has no criminal antecedents.

(3.) In Prathvi Raj v. Union of India, AIR 2020 SC 1036, a three-judge bench of Supreme Court read down S. 18 by declaring as follows, [10]. Concerning the applicability of provisions of sec. 438 Cr.PC, it shall not apply to the cases under Act of 1989. However, if the complaint does not make out a prima facie case for applicability of the provisions of the Act of 1989, the bar created by sec. 18 and 18A (i) shall not apply.