In view of the above settled legal position, it is no more res integra that economic offences constitute a class apart, as they have deep rooted conspiracies involving huge loss of public funds, and therefore such offences need to be viewed seriously. They are considered as grave and serious offences affecting the economy of the country as a whole and thereby posing serious threats to the financial health of the country. The law aids only the abiding and certainly not its resistant's. When after the investigation, a chargesheet is submitted in the court, or in a complaint case, summons or warrant is issued to the Accused, he is bound to submit himself to the authority of law. If he is creating hindrances in the execution of warrants or is concealing himself and does not submit to the authority of law, he must not be granted the privilege of anticipatory bail, particularly when the Court taking cognizance has found him prima facie involved in serious economic offences or heinous offences. In such cases when the court has reason to believe that the person against whom the warrant has been issued has absconded or is concealing himself so that warrant could not be executed, the concerned court would be perfectly justified in initiating the proclamation proceedings against him Under Section 82 Code of Criminal Procedure The High Courts should also consider the factum of issuance of non-bailable warrants and initiation of proclamation proceedings seriously and not casually, while considering the anticipatory bail application of such Accused.
{Para 23}
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Criminal Appeal No. 1872 of 2025
Decided On: 09.04.2025
Serious Fraud Investigation Office Vs. Aditya Sarda
Hon'ble Judges/Coram:
Bela M. Trivedi and P.B. Varale, JJ.
Author: Bela M. Trivedi, J.
Citation: MANU/SC/0479/2025.
Read full judgment here: Click here.
No comments:
Post a Comment