Full Judgment Text
[ REPORTABLE ]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL) NO. 5568 OF 2011
Bhaskar Mishra ….Petitioner
Versus
State of Madhya Pradesh …..Respondent
O R D E R
1. This Special Leave Petition is an example of the gross misuse of the
process of the Court. The facts are as under:
2. A case under Section 307 of the Indian Penal Code was registered
against the petitioner in Police Station MIG, Indore, Madhya Pradesh.
Apprehending his arrest, he filed an application for anticipatory bail under
rd
Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. on the 3 of September 2010 before the Court
th
of Sessions which was dismissed on the 7 September 2010. The
petitioner thereupon filed a similar application before the Madhya Pradesh
th
High Court and on the 24 September 2010 the High Court granted
anticipatory bail to the petitioner for a period of four weeks and also
directed him to apply for regular bail in the meanwhile. The petitioner
th
accordingly filed an application dated 5 of October 2010 in the Court of
Sessions, Indore under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for the grant of regular
th
bail. The matter was listed on seven different dates between the 5 of
st
October 2010 and the 1 of November 2010 and except for one date (i.e.
th
the 20 October 2010) the petitioner remained absent during the hearing
of the bail application pleading sickness. The Sessions Judge finally
st
dismissed the application on the 1 of November 2010. The petitioner
th
again moved the High Court on the 26 October 2010 praying that the
period of four weeks granted by the High Court for moving an application
th
for regular bail be extended. The High Court vide its order dated 26
th
October 2010 extended the time up till 12 November 2010. The
petitioner instead of surrendering before the Sessions Court filed another
th
application dated 8 November 2010 in the High Court under Section 438
read with Sections 439 and 482 of the Cr.P.C. for the grant of regular bail.
th
This application was dismissed by the High Court on the 12 of November
2010, by observing that an application under Section 439 would lie only if
an accused was in custody. Still undeterred, the petitioner filed yet
another application for further extending the period of four weeks which
th
too was dismissed on the 16 of December 2010. The petitioner
thereupon filed SLP (CRL) No. 849-850 of 2011 impugning the orders
th th
dated 12 November, 2010 and 16 December, 2010 which was dismissed
st
by this Court on the 1 of February 2011. After the dismissal of the SLP,
the petitioner filed yet another application under Section 438 of the
Criminal Procedure Code before the High Court on the plea that the
judgment of this Court in Siddharam Satlingapppa Mhetre Versus State of
Maharashtra and Others [2011 (1) SCC 694] had not earlier been brought
to the notice of the High Court or the Supreme Court. This application too
th
has been dismissed by the impugned order dated 29 April, 2011
observing that the cited judgment was not applicable to the facts of the
case as four earlier applications for anticipatory bail had been rejected.
This order has now been impugned before us.
3. We have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and gone
through the record. The facts reproduced above show that the petitioner
has been absconding and though he has been shown great indulgence by
the Sessions as well as the High Court on several occasions, the directions
issued by the courts have been relentlessly flouted. We are, therefore, of
the opinion that the repeated applications are a gross misuse of the
process of the court and the matter has to be dealt with in that
background. We accordingly dismiss the Special Leave Petition and direct
that no further application for bail anticipatory or otherwise will be
entertained by any Court until and unless the petitioner deposits a sum of
Rupees One Lac before the Court of Sessions at Indore as a pre condition
for the consideration of any bail application that he may choose to file. A
copy of this order be sent to the Registrar General of the Madhya Pradesh
High Court as also to the Sessions Judge who is seized of the matter.
4. The Special Leave Petition is dismissed accordingly.
………………………….J.
(HARJIT SINGH BEDI)
………………………….J.
(GYAN SUDHA MISRA)
th
DATED: 8 AUGUST 2011
NEW DELHI.