whose anticipatory bail was dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court ought to have surrendered himse

PAWAN KAMRA.VS. STATE OF DELHI., W.P.(CRL) 2830/2019 & CRL M.A. 37490/2019 & Crl. M.A. 37491/2019. – 1 October 2019.

The Hon’ble High Court of the State Capital, consisting of Justice Brijesh Sethi pronounced judgment on a petition filed by the Pawan Kamra challenging the Order dated 26.09.2019 passed by Mr. Sanjay Khanagwal, Ld. Special Judge and issuance of notice dated 27.09.2019 by the IO.

The issue here was the coercive action taken by the investigating officer against the wife and daughter of the petitioner on 27.09.2019. At the house of the petitioner, a notice stating that her husband is deliberately evading arrest was pasted and directed the wife and daughter of the petitioner to vacate the above said premises.  The contention put forth was regarding the illegality and voidity of notice so issued in the name of his wife. In the meantime, IO moved an application on 26.09.2019 for initiating a proceeding under section 83 of Cr.P.C. against the petitioner. It was prayed that the order dated 26.09.2019 be quashed and the notice of the IO dated 27.09.2019 be also set aside in the interest of justice. Ld. Addl. Standing Counsel has opposed the same. It was submitted that that anticipatory bail of the petitioner had been dismissed by the Hon’ble Supreme Court. He evaded arrest and had not surrendered before the court after the dismissal of the application. The house in question belonged to the petitioner and procedure prescribed by law was followed by the investigating agency. No grounds for stay were made.

The petitioner whose anticipatory bail was dismissed by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 26.06.2019, ought to have surrendered himself before the IO or court concerned.  He is, however, evading arrest.  So far as petition for quashing of the FIR is concerned, the same was filed on 29.07.2019 i.e. approximately one month after the dismissal of the anticipatory bail application by Hon’ble Supreme Court.  The petitioner did not surrender even after dismissal of the anticipatory bail application.  He has, no doubt, filed a petition for quashing of FIR and this court will decide the same including the question whether it is maintainable or not.  However, the proceedings initiated by the IO under Section 83 Cr.P.C. cannot be stayed at this stage.

Considering the above stated, this Court observed the following:

1. The petitioner was involved in FIR No. 11/11 under Section 13(1)(d) of POC Act r/w Section 120B/420 IPC, PS AC Branch-GNCT of Delhi.

2. He moved an anticipatory bail application which was first dismissed by Ld. Trial Court, thereafter by Hon’ble High Court and finally by Hon’ble Supreme Court on 26.06.2019.

3. The petitioner had to be surrendered before the IO or Court concerned after the dismissal of his anticipatory bail but refused to do so and he evaded arrest.

The Court then concluded by delivering the following judgment:

” The proceedings initiated by the IO under Section 83 Cr.P.C. cannot be stayed at this stage. The respondent is carrying out the proceedings as per law and no interference is required from this court in this regard. There are no grounds to quash the order of the Ld. ASJ/Special Judge PC Act-02 dated 26.09.2019 and notice dated 27.09.2019 issued by the IO and the proceedings under section 83 Cr.P.C. stands dismissed.”

View/Download Judgment: Pawan Kamra v. State

– Jumanah Kader

#anticipatorybail #surrender #DelhiHighCourt #JumanahKader #83crpc