The single judge bench of the Jharkhand High Court held that if the accused persons do not appear despite the notice under Section 41-A CrPC being issued, then in such a circumstance the Investigating Officer can proceed as per law. It was furthermore held that the protection under Section 41-A is thus confined to the stage of investigation and not after it is concluded and on cognizance of the offense, processes are issued under Section 204 of the Cr.P.C.
Brief facts
The factual matrix of the case is that the present criminal miscellaneous petition is filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. seeking clarification as to whether the Petitioners have to surrender before the court or not in accordance with the disposal of the anticipatory bail application.
Contentions of the Petitioners
The Petitioner contended that the anticipatory bail application was dismissed as not maintainable since notice under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. had already been issued against the Petitioners.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble Court observed that from the bare perusal of Section 41-A CrPC, it is clear that such notices are issued only when the arrest is not required under Section 41(1) of the Cr.P.C. If the accused against whom the notice is issued under Section 41-A Cr.P.C. is arrested when he/she appears before the Investigating Agency in compliance with the said notice, then, it will lead to the violation of the statutory provision. However, if the accused person does not appear despite the notice being issued, then in such a circumstance the Investigating Officer can proceed as per law.
It was noted that section 41-A(3) stipulates that if the individual complies with the notice and does not violate it, he will not be arrested for the offense mentioned in the notice unless the police officer believes he should be arrested for reasons that will be recorded. Protection under Section 41-A is therefore limited to the investigation stage, not after it is over and cognizance of the offense is issued under Section 204 of the Cr.P.C.
It was furthermore noted that in the instant case, the Petitioner had cooperated with the investigation during the stage of investigation and had appeared on notice under 41(A) Cr.P.C.
Based on these considerations, the court held the anticipatory bail application of the petitioners was dismissed as not maintainable.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court disposed of the criminal miscellaneous petition.
Case title: Kalpana Devi V. The State of Jharkhand
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Gautam Kumar Choudhary
Case No.: Cr. M.P. No. 1124 of 2024
Advocates for the Petitioner: Mr. Azam, Advocate : Ms. Aulia Begum, Advocate
Advocate for the State: Mr. P.D. Agarwal, Special P.P.
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
