Accused under arrest in one case can seek anticipatory bail in another case while in jail: Orissa High Court

The Orissa High Court has held that there is no legal bar preventing an accused person who is already in jail in connection with a criminal case from applying for anticipatory bail in another case registered against him [Sanjay Kumar Sarangi & Ors v State & Anr]..Justice Shashikant Mishra, however, clarified that such anticipatory bail, if granted, would be effective only if the accused is arrested in connection with the subsequent case after his release from custody in the previous case."There is no provision in the Code (Code of Criminal Procedure) that takes away the right of the accused to seek his liberty or of the investigating agency to investigate into the case only because he is in custody in another case ... There is no statutory bar for an accused in custody in connection with a case to pray for grant of anticipatory bail in another case registered against him," the Court's April 10 judgment stated..The Court made the observation was dealing with a batch of petitions by persons who were already in jail for their alleged involvement in one criminal case but who later sought anticipatory bail in connection with separate criminal cases registered subsequently against them. .The Court noted that there is no specific provision in the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) governing a situation where a person who is already in custody in connection with one case is sought to be re-arrested or remanded in another case. In such a scenario, the accused can only be remanded in connection with the subsequent case on court orders, the judge observed."Can the order of the remand in such a situation be equated with an act of arrest? ... Since he is already arrested and in custody, he can only be taken on remand for the purpose of investigation, if required ... If such order granting remand is passed, it would no longer be open to the accused to seek anticipatory bail but he can seek regular bail," the Court explained. .Another possible scenario is where a person who is arrested in one case is subsequently released from prison, only for his arrest to be required again in connection with a separate criminal case. The Bench proceeded to conclude that there is no legal bar to prevent such an accused person from filing for anticipatory bail even before his release from prison. The Court held that all rights conferred on the accused, as well as the investigating agencies, are independently protected in each separate case."As it is not possible to arrest a person already in custody, it follows that when, on being released from custody in the former case, he is sought to be arrested in the new case, there is no reason why he shall be restrained from moving the Court beforehand to arm himself with necessary protection in the form of anticipatory bail to protect himself from such a situation," the Court said..The Court added that investigating agencies can move the concerned court seeking the remand of accused persons already in jail if their custody is required in connection with another case. If such a prayer for remand is granted, then the only option left for the accused to secure release from prison is to file a regular bail plea, the Court observed."The investigating agency, if it feels necessary for the purpose of interrogation/investigation can seek remand of the accused whilst he is in custody in connection with the previous case and if such prayer is allowed, the accused can no longer pray for grant of anticipatory bail as then he would be technically in custody in connection with the subsequent case also. Then, he can only seek regular or custody bail," the Court said..The Court also highlighted that the legislative intent behind Section 438 (anticipatory bail) of the CrPC is to protect people from the ignominy of being arrested and being subjected to undue humiliation and loss of dignity. "This is all the more necessary when a person is sought to be implicated on false accusations," the Court added..Having clarified these legal aspects, the Court proceeded to grant anticipatory bail to the accused-petitioners before it. In these cases, the Court found that the prosecution had neither sought nor obtained any court order for the remand of the accused petitioners in the subsequent cases registered against them.Thus, the Court held that their anticipatory bail applications were maintainable and allowed the same..Senior Advocate SC Mohapatra and advocates SK Mohapatra, L Achari, D Panda, A Mohanty, P Patnaik, J Sahoo appeared for the petitioners.Additional Standing Counsel SK Mishra represented the State, while advocates SN Mishra, and K Panda appeared for other respondents..[Read Judgment]