NON-REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.  662 OF 2018 (Arising out of S.L.P.(Crl.)No.1410 of 2018)

Prem Giri     ….Appellant(s)

VERSUS

State of Rajasthan    ….Respondent(s)

                 J U D G M E N T

Abhay Manohar Sapre, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. This  appeal  is  filed  against  the  order  dated

05.02.2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature

for  Rajasthan  at  Jodhpur  in  S.B.  Criminal  Misc.

Bail No. 9471 of 2017 whereby the Single Judge of

the  High  Court  dismissed  the  application  for

anticipatory bail filed by the appellant herein.  

1

3. Facts  of  the  case  lie  in  a  narrow  compass.

They,  however,  need  to  be  mentioned  infra  to

appreciate the short issue involved in the case.

4. The  appellant  apprehending  his  arrest  in

connection  with  commission  of  the  offences

punishable under Sections 143, 341, 323, 308 332

and 353 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter

referred to as “IPC”)  pursuant to FIR No. 332/2017

registered  at  Police  Station  Jaitaran,  District  Pali

filed  an  application  for  grant  of  anticipatory  bail

under  Section  438  of  the  Code  of  Criminal

Procedure,  1973  (hereinafter  referred  to  as  “the

Code”)   before  the  High  Court  of  judicature  for

Rajasthan  at  Jodhpur  being  S.B.  Criminal  Misc.

Bail No. 9471/2017.  

5. The Single  Judge by order dated 22.11.2017

dismissed  the  application.  The  appellant,  felt

aggrieved by the order of dismissal, filed S.L.P.(Crl.)

2

No.  9672  of  2017  in  this  Court,  which  on  being

granted leave was registered as Criminal Appeal No.

2188/2017.

6. This  Court,   by  order  dated  14.12.2017

(Annexure-P-5)  allowed  the  appeal,  set  aside  the

order dated 22.11.2017 passed by the Single Judge

of the High Court  and remanded the case to the

High Court with a request to decide the appellant's

bail application afresh on merits.  

7. This  Court  remanded  the  case  to  the  High

Court because it  was noticed that the High Court

while dismissing the application had not assigned

any reason in support of the dismissal.

8. On  remand,  the  High  Court,  by  impugned

order dated 05.02.2018 in S.B.Crl.  Misc.  Bail  No.

9471/2017,  without  setting  out  the  facts  and

assigning  any  reasons,  again  dismissed  the

appellant's bail application, which has given rise to

3

filing of this appeal by way of special leave in this

Court by the appellant.

9. Heard Mr. Sushil Kumar Jain, learned senior

counsel  for  the  appellant  and  Mr.  Anish  Kumar

Gupta, learned counsel for the respondent-State.  

10. Having  heard  the  learned  counsel  for  the

parties and on perusal of the record of the case, we

are inclined to allow the appeal and while  setting

aside of the impugned order remand the case to the

High Court for deciding the bail application afresh

on merits and in accordance with law.

11. The impugned order reads as under:  

“Heard  learned  counsel  for  the  accused petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor so also learned counsel for the complainant.

After perusing the order impugned and considering  the  facts  and  circumstances  of the  case,  I  am  not  inclined  to  grant anticipatory  bail  to  the  accused  petitioner, hence,  the  instant  application  for anticipatory bail is hereby dismissed.”

4

12. It  seems  that  while  passing  the  impugned

order,  the order dated 14.12.2017 passed by this

Court on the earlier occasion in this very case was

not brought to the notice of the High Court.

13. In our view, the order impugned also suffers

with the same error on which this Court, by order

dated 14.12.2017, had set aside the earlier order of

the High Court.  In other words, this Court set aside

the earlier order of  the High Court because it  did

not  contain  any  reasoning.   The  impugned  order

suffers from the same error.

14. We, therefore, allow the appeal, set aside the

impugned order dated 05.02.2018 and remand the

case to the High Court with a request to decide the

bail application filed by the appellant under Section

438 of the Code afresh on merits in accordance with

law.  

5

15. Needless to observe, the High Court will take

into  consideration  our  earlier  order  dated

14.12.2017  while  passing  the  order  on  the

application.     

………...................................J. [R.K. AGRAWAL]

                                     …...……..................................J.

        [ABHAY MANOHAR SAPRE] New Delhi; May 02, 2018  

6