SC SLAPS RUPEES TWO LAKH FINE OVER REPEATED ATTEMPTS FOR BAIL

The Supreme Court recently imposed a fine of Rupees 2 lakhs on a petitioner who attempted "to exploit procedural law" by withdrawing his anticipatory bail application twice in the High Court before approaching the Apex Court. The appellant in the case of PARTEEK ARORA @ PARTEEK JUNEJA v. STATE OF PUNJAB was the recipient of such a hefty fine. 

The bench of Justice JK Maheshwari and Justice Arvind Kumar was hearing an anticipatory bail plea. They observed that the accused had withdrawn his application before the High Court on September 30, 2024, upon noting the court's reluctance to grant bail. In a subsequent application, the High Court took a firm stance, pointing out that despite the FIR being registered on June 25, 2023, no action had been taken against the accused for over a year. The court also directed the police to submit a status report on the investigation. When the matter was relisted, the petitioner once again withdrew the application. Considering the circumstances, the Supreme Court bench took a serious view of the petitioner’s actions, observing that he was attempting to exploit the law for personal benefit. 

The Court noted that the petitioner had deliberately withdrawn his applications for anticipatory bail twice before the High Court, seemingly to avoid an unfavorable outcome, and then sought relief from the Apex Court. Deeming this behavior as an abuse of procedural law, the bench imposed a hefty cost of Rupees 2 lakhs on the petitioner to discourage such conduct. Furthermore, the Supreme Court issued a strict directive to the Police Commissioner of Amritsar, instructing that the petitioner be arrested within three days. This decision underscores the Court's firm stance against misuse of legal processes and reinforces the importance of ensuring accountability in judicial proceedings. The Court expressed their frustration over the actions of the appellant by stating "It is a fact that even after rejection of the first bail application and the second bail application, the petitioner has not been taken into custody. Thereby, petitioner intends to take undue advantage of procedural law for reasons best known". 

The Court laid down a important warning to future abusers of the procedural law established to facilitate the deliverance of justice.