The Allahabad High Court has recently said that Application for anticipatory bail filed by the accused cannot be rejected on the ground that charge sheet has been filed in the case and court has taken cognizance of the offense. The High Court has said that even after the chargesheet has been filed in the case and the court has taken cognizance of the crime, the application filed by the accused for anticipatory bail is maintainable. According to the case, Dr. Kartikeya Sharma, a resident of Aligarh, was married to Dr. Pallavi Sharma. Dr. Pallavi Sharma had filed a dowry harassment complaint against her husband Kartikeya Sharma and his parents at Quarsi police station in Aligarh. The accused had applied for anticipatory bail in the same case. The Sessions Court rejected the anticipatory bail application on the ground that charge sheet has been filed in the case and the concerned court has taken cognizance of the offense. The accused in the case challenged the order of the Sessions Court rejecting the anticipatory bail application in the High Court and demanded to be granted anticipatory bail. Opposing the anticipatory bail application, the public prosecutor said that The court had issued summons to the accused but the accused did not appear in the court, after that the court had issued a non-bailable warrant against them. Even after the non-bailable warrant, the police could not arrest the accused. After which the accused have been declared absconding accused under section 82 of CrPC, The public prosecutor, citing the decision of the Supreme Court, said that the absconding accused cannot be granted anticipatory bail. The anticipatory bail applicants said that they are all educated and doctors by profession. He said that he never harassed the complainant for dowry nor treated her with any kind of cruelty nor ever demanded dowry. Counsel for the anticipatory bail applicants submitted that the present anticipatory bail application was filed before the accused were declared absconders under section 82 of the CrPC . In such a situation, the decision of the Supreme Court referred to by the Government Pleader is not applicable in the present case. After hearing the views of both the parties on the anticipatory bail application, Justice Nalin Kumar Srivastava's bench while granting anticipatory bail to the applicants said that Anticipatory bail can be granted at any time before the accused is arrested even after the charge sheet has been presented to the court and the court has taken cognizance of the offence.The court further said that in the present case it is appropriate to grant anticipatory bail to the accused as the charges leveled against the accused in the case have a provision of maximum sentence of 7 years if the charges are proved. Further, the accused have fully cooperated with the investigation, there is nothing in the evidence available on record to infer that the accused would misuse the bail.
