ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE GOVERNMENT OF INDIAversusKAPIL WADHAWAN & ANR. ETC
- Citation
- 2023 INSC 1090
- Decided
- 24 April 2023
- Disposal
- Appeal(s) allowed
Holding
Paragraph 51 is clarified to confirm that the High Court's default bail order under proviso (a)(ii) of Section 167(2) CrPC is upheld, while any other pending issues are to be addressed by an appropriate bench.
Summary
The appellant filed an interlocutory application seeking clarification of paragraph 51 of the Supreme Court's judgment dated 27 March 2023 in Criminal Appeals Nos. 701‑702 of 2020, which had upheld a default bail order granted by the Bombay High Court under proviso (a)(ii) of Section 167(2) of the CrPC. The Court examined whether the earlier judgment was limited to the specific issue referred to the larger bench and whether other matters raised in the appeals required consideration by a different bench. It corrected paragraph 51 to expressly state that the High Court's default bail order is upheld, but any other pending issues will be dealt with by an appropriate bench of the Supreme Court. The clarification thereby affirmed the legality of granting default bail under Section 167(2) while reserving jurisdiction over remaining questions. Consequently, the interlocutory application was allowed and any pending applications were disposed of.
Issues considered
- Whether paragraph 51 of the Supreme Court judgment dated 27‑03‑2023 requires clarification regarding its scope.
- Whether the High Court's order granting default bail under proviso (a)(ii) of Section 167(2) CrPC is in order.
- Whether other issues raised in the appeals should be decided by a different bench of the Supreme Court.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s. 167(2)
Subjects
Judgment
[2023] 16 S.C.R. 1133 : 2023 INSC 1090
CASE DETAILS
ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE GOVERNMENT OF INDIA
v.
KAPIL WADHAWAN & ANR. ETC.
(Interlocutory Application No. 74084 of 2023)
In
(Criminal Appeal Nos. 701-702 of 2020)
APRIL 24, 2023
[K. M. JOSEPH, HRISHIKESH ROY AND
B. V. NAGARATHNA, JJ.]
HEADNOTES
Issue for consideration: Matter pertains to application filed by the
appellant seeking clarification of the judgment dated 27.03.2023 passed
by this Court in Crl App Nos. 701-702 of 2020, Enforcement Directorate,
Government of India v. Kapil Wadhawan & Anr. Etc.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 167(2) – Judgment/order
as regards grant of default bail – Clarification of – Application by the
appellant seeking clarification of the judgment dated 27.03.2023 passed
by this Court in Crl App Nos. 701-702 of 2020 Enforcement Directorate,
Government of India v. Kapil Wadhawan & Anr. Etc.:
Held: Paragraph 51 in the Crl App Nos. 701-702 of 2020 pronounced
on 27.03.2023 by this Court is clarified, making the corrections as stated
therein. [Para 3]
OTHER CASE DETAILS INCLUDING IMPUGNED
ORDER AND APPEARANCES
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Interlocutory Application
No.74084 of 2023 in Criminal Appeal Nos.701-702 of 2020.
From the Judgment and Order dated 20.08.2020 of the High Court of
Judicature at Bombay in LD-VC-BA Nos.400 and 401 of 2020.
1133
1134 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2023] 16 S.C.R.
Appearances:
S. V. Raju, A.S.G., Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Kanu Agarwal, Rajan
Kumar Choursia, Annam Venkatesh, Ms. Sairica Raju, Arkaj Kumar, Zoheb
Hussain, Advs. for the Appellant.
Kapil Sibal, Mukul Rohatgi, Sr. Advs., Mahesh Agarwal, Ankur
Saigal, Rohan Dakshini, Shubham Kulshreshtha, Kaustubh Singh, Ms.
Kamakshi Sehgal, Ms. Pooja Kothari, Ms. Urvi Gupte, E. C. Agrawala,
Shrirang B. Varma, Siddharth Dharmadhikari, Aaditya Aniruddha Pande,
Bharat Bagla, Sourav Singh, Sarad Kumar Singhania, Amit K. Nain, Advs.
for the Respondents.
JUDGMENT / ORDER OF THE SUPREME COURT
ORDER
1. This application is filed by the applicant/appellant seeking
clarification of the judgment dated 27th March, 2023 passed by this Court.
The relief sought in the prayer, inter alia, is as follows:-
“(I) Clarify ‘Para 51’of the Judgment dated 27.03.2023 passed by this
Hon’ble Court to the effect that the said judgment is only restricted
to answering the issue referred to the larger bench and that several
other issues which have been raised in the appeal would have to be
considered by the appropriate bench of this Hon’ble Court till which
time the impugned order of the High Court granting default bail,
cannot be upheld by holding the same to be either correct or found
to be in order.”
2. Heard Mr. S. V. Raju, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing
on behalf of the applicant/appellant and Mr. Mukul Rohatgi and Mr. Kapil
Sibal, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents.
3. The paragraph-51 in the Criminal Appeal Nos.701-702 of 2020
pronounced on 27.03.2023 by this Court following correction, should now
read as under:-
“51. Following the above discussion and opinion, the impugned order
of the High Court granting default bail to the respondents by applying
the proviso (a) (ii) of Section 167(2) CrPC is found to be in order in
ENFORCEMENT DIRECTORATE GOVERNMENT OF 1135
INDIA v. KAPIL WADHAWAN & ANR. ETC.
terms of the reference made before this Court in respect of question
referred before this Court and answered by us. Hence, we also uphold
the impugned judgment dated 20.08.2020 passed by the learned Single
Judge of the Bombay High Court. Any other pending issues arising
from these appeals are to be addressed by an appropriate Bench of
this Court.”
4. The Interlocutory Application No.74084 of 2023 is allowed.
5. Pending application(s), if any, stand disposed of.
Headnotes prepared by: IA allowed.
Nidhi Jain
Search Indian case law
Ask in plain English, not just keywords. 25,000 AI words free, no card.