Courts Must Not Hesitate In Denying Liberty To An Accused To Ensure Corruption Free Society: Supreme Court
The Supreme Court dismissed a Petition against the Order of the High Court by which it denied anticipatory bail to the accused in a corruption case.
The Supreme Court emphasised that the Courts should not hesitate in denying liberty to an accused to ensure corruption free society.
The Court emphasised thus in a Petition for Special Leave to Appeal against the Order of the High Court by which it denied anticipatory bail to the accused in a corruption case.
The two-Judge Bench of Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan observed, “If liberty is to be denied to an accused to ensure corruption free society, then the courts should not hesitate in denying such liberty. Where overwhelming considerations in the nature aforesaid require denial of anticipatory bail, it has to be denied. It is altogether a different thing to say that once the investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed, the court may consider to grant regular bail to a public servant - accused of indulging in corruption.”
The Bench said that the presumption of innocence, by itself, cannot be the sole consideration for grant of anticipatory bail.
Advocate Sanya Kaushal appeared on behalf of the Petitioner/Accused.
Brief Facts
The High Court had denied anticipatory bail to the Petitioner-accused in connection with an FIR registered with the Vigilance Bureau, Police Station, Patiala for the offence punishable under Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (PC Act) and Section 61(2) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (BNS). The accused was serving as an Audit Inspector with the Government.
It was alleged that he demanded illegal gratification in connection with conducting of audit pertaining to development work undertaken during the tenure of the wife of the Complainant as Sarpanch of the Gram Panchayat. It was further alleged that the co-accused actually collected the bribe amount for and on behalf of the Petitioner herein for the Complainant. Apprehending his arrest in connection with the said offence, the accused prayed for anticipatory bail which the High Court declined. Hence, he was before the Apex Court.
Reasoning
The Supreme Court in the above regard, noted, “The presumption of innocence is one of the considerations, which the court should keep in mind while considering the plea for anticipatory bail. The salutary rule is to balance the cause of the accused and the cause of public justice. Over solicitous homage to the accused’s liberty can, sometimes, defeat the cause of public justice.”
The Court further remarked that avarice is a common frailty of mankind and Robert Walpole's famous pronouncement that all men have their price, notwithstanding the unsavoury cynicism that it suggests, is not very far from truth.
“If even a fraction of what was the vox pupuli about the magnitude of corruption to be true, then it would not be far removed from the truth, that it is the rampant corruption indulged in with impunity by highly placed persons that has led to economic unrest in this country. If one is asked to name one sole factor that effectively arrested the progress of our society to prosperity, undeniably it is corruption”, it said.
The Court added that if the society in a developing country faces a menace greater than even the one from the hired assassins to its law and order, then that is from the corrupt elements at the higher echelons of the Government and of the political parties.
“In the overall view of the matter, we are convinced that the High Court rightly denied anticipatory bail to the petitioner herein”, it concluded.
Accordingly, the Apex Court dismissed the Petition and upheld the High Court’s decision.
Cause Title- Devinder Kumar Bansal v. The State of Punjab (Neutral Citation: 2025 INSC 320)
