NARSINGH LAL DAGA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is an application for anticipatory bail. A rule was issued and it was ordered that the petitioners would not be arrested till the final disposal of this petition. The case against the petitioners is under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (Kereinafter to be referred to as the Act) and rule 114 of the Defence and Internal Security of India Rules, 1971 (hereinafter to be called the Rules).

(2.) ANTICIPATORY bail is not to be granted as a matter of Rule. It is to be granted only in special cases where some influential persons try to implicate their rivals in false cases for the purposes of disgracing them or for other purposes by getting them detained in Jail for some days. This is the main reason given by the Law Commission of India in its first Report for introducing provision for anticipatory bail in the Criminal Procedure Code of 1973 (hereinafter to be referred to as the Code). In that reason, however, there is a sentence which reads as follows:

(3.) MR . Sanyal has then argued on the merits of the case and has urged that the allegations do not make out a case under Rule 114 of the Rules and, therefore, it is a case where the petitioners should be granted bail. It is true that sometimes some Rule of the Defence and Internal Security of India Rules is quoted in the report submitted by the police officers merely to make the case serious and disentitle the accused of bail which he would ordinarily get. For an offence under Rule 114 of the Rules, unless the Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of contravention of the rule, he should not be released on bail. I do not want to express any opinion at this stage when only an application for anticipatory bail has been made on the question as to whether on the allegations the petitioners can be said to have contravened any provision of the Rule. But I would like to observe that after the petitioners surrender and make an application for bail the Court to which such application is made will not be influenced in the least by this order refusing anticipatory bail to the petitioners or by the fact that Rule 114 of the Rules is also mentioned in the report against them; the Court will consider the case of the petitioners on merits and pass necessary orders.