look news india
News India Live, Digital Desk: A common perception about the law has been that if an accused does not come when called by the police or the court declares him a ‘fugitive’ (proclaimed criminal), then he loses his right to ask for ‘anticipatory bail’. Often lawyers also used to say to their clients that brother, now you have become a declared criminal, now you will not get bail. but recently Allahabad High Court Has made such a comment on this, which has started a new debate in the legal circles.
What did the court say? (in simple language)
The Allahabad High Court has made it clear that no accused can be stopped from seeking anticipatory bail merely on the basis of being a ‘proclaimed offender’. The court believes that ‘liberty’ i.e. freedom is a fundamental right of every human being, and no legal ‘tag’ can take it away completely. The judge clearly said that the application of the accused should be heard, even if he had earlier been declared a fugitive.
Why is this decision so important?
If we look at it, it was always said in the old decisions that the person who is running away from the law should not get the benefit of the law. But Allahabad High Court has given priority to ‘humanitarian approach’ here. Many times it also happens that due to wrong action of the police or lack of information, a person is declared a fugitive. In such a situation, there should be a way for that person to prove himself right and avoid arrest.
Does this mean that now everyone will get bail?
There’s a little catch here. The court has only said that his application ‘Maintainable’ Is. This does not at all mean that every absconding criminal will now be granted bail directly. The court has made it clear that the application can be accepted, but when the turn comes to give the verdict, then things like the past behavior of the accused, the reason for his absconding and non-cooperation in the investigation will be taken into consideration. That is, there is a ‘right’ to apply, but not a ‘guarantee’.
Reconciliation of law and personal freedom
This decision is a big hope for those people who were not able to present their views before the court due to getting entangled in some legal complications. This stand of the High Court shows that taking away freedom by sitting on the chair of justice should be the last resort, not the first.
What do you think about this? Is it right to give absconding criminals a chance to seek bail or will it create more difficulties in the police investigation? Please tell us your opinion in the comments.