Bail in Economic Offences
A Special Focus on the INX Media Case
Keywords:
Bail, Economic Offences, Investigation, INX Media Case, Pre-Arrest Bail, Triple TestAbstract
ABSTRACT
With a sudden upsurge of economic offences in the country over the last few decades and account of offenders evading conviction by fleeing the country, the need for a strong Criminal Justice System primarily with regard to bail applications is a pressing priority.
The courts in the process of maintaining a balance between the individual’s liberty (which is the objective behind the provision of bail in the Criminal Justice System), and interests of the larger society, have not turned a blind eye to the fact that such offences are to be addressed sparingly as they are crime against the society and not against any private individual.
Denial of the bail applications filed by P. Chidambaram in the INX Media case by the Delhi High Court was deterred by the Apex Court in the appeals and the Court laid down some important principles with respect to bails in economic offences and entirely discouraged anticipatory bail in these cases. Though there is no exhaustive list of rules concerning bail in such offences but the guidelines laid down in the Prahalad Singh Bhatis’s case and the triple test or tripod test are two of the significant factors in considerations for bail applications under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code.
References
1. Nagendra v. King-Emperor, AIR 1924 Cal 476, 479, 480.
2. Jagjit Singh v. The State of Punjab, 1978 Cri LJ 759.
3. Babu Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh, AIR 1978 SC 527.
4. Deepak Gupta v. State of Orrisa, 2016 Cri LJ 3191.
5. Gurcharan Singh v. State (Delhi Administration), 1978 AIR 179.
6. Ram Govind Upadhyay v. Sudarshan Singh, (2002) 3 SCC 598.
7. Gudikanti Narasimhulu v. Public Prosecutor, AIR 1978 SC 429.
8. Niranjan Singh v. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote, 1980 CRI. L.J. 426 SC.
9. State of Orissa v. Jagannath Patel, 1991(3) CRIMES 858.
10. Dr. Vinod Bhandari v. State of M.P., 2015 CriLJ 1547.
11. State of Rajasthan v. Balchand, 1977 AIR 2447.
12. Dr. Vinod Bhandari v. State of M.P., 2015 CriLJ 1547.
13. Prahlad Singh Bhati v. NCT, Delhi, (2001) 4 SCC 280.
14. State of U.P. v. Amarmani Tripathi.
15. Central Bureau of Investigation v. V. Vijay Sai Reddy, (2013) 7 SCC 452.
16. R. V. Kelkar, Criminal Procedure. 6th Ed. New Delhi: EBC; 2014. 2014).
17. Shri Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565.
18. Gurbaksh Singh v. State of Punjab, 1980 SCC 465.
19. State v. Radhakrishnan, 2003(1)C TC 530
20. Sahilendra Kumar Singh v. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, 2004 (94) EC C 371.
21. Seniors Fraud Investigation Office v. Nittin Johari, (2019) 9 SCC 165.
22. Indu Dewan v. Republic of India (C.B.I), 2016 (II) OLR 834.
23. Muraleedharan v. State of Kerala, 2001 AIR SCW 1687.
24. Indu Dewan v. Republic of India (C.B.I), 2016 (II) OLR 834.
25. Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, AIR 2012 SC 830.
26. Mohan Singh v. Union Territory, Chandigarh, AIR 1978 SC 1095.
27. Indu Dewan v. Republic of India (C.B.I), 2016 (II) OLR 834.
28. Enforcement Officer, Ted, Bombay v. Bher Chand Tikaji Bora, 2000 (121) ELT 7 (SC).
29. C.B.I. v. Anil Sharma, 1997 CriLJ 4414.
30. State v. Radhakrishnan, 2003 (1) C TC 530.
31. P. Chidambaram v. Central Bureau of Investigation, AIR 2019 SC 5272.
32. Niranjan Singh v. Prabhakar Rajaram Kharote, 1980 CRI. L.J. 426 SC.
33. Kashi Nath Roy v. State of Bihar, 1996 SCC (4) 539.
34. Kalyan Chandra Sarkar v. Rajesh Ranjan, (2004) 7 SCC 528.
35. P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement, AIR 2019 SC 198.
36. P. Chidambaram v. Directorate of Enforcement, 2019 (3) ALT (Crl.) 529 (A.P.). Cite this Article Oshi Priya. Bail in Economic Offences: A Special Focus on the INX Media Case . 3(2): 26–34p.
