SAMUNDER SINGHversusSTATE OF RAJASTHAN & OTHERS

                         SAMUNDER SINGH                                          A
                                v.
                   STATE OF RAJASTHAN & OTHERS

                              JANUARY 12, 1987

                  [M.P. THAKKAR AND B.C. RAY, JJ.]                               B

      ' Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: s. 438---Aitticipatory bai/-
    When not lo be granted.

          While the matter regarding the unnatural death of the daughter·
    in-law at the house of her father-in-law was still under investigation the   C
    High Court granted anticipatory bail to the accused in disregard of the
    magnitude and seriousness or the matter.

          Subsequent to the fillng of the appeal by special leave by the
    father of the deceased the investigation had been concluded by the
    police and challan filed, and the accused were released on ball by the       D
    Chief Judicial Magistrate.

          Dismissing tlie appeal as infructuous, the Court,

          HELD: The High Court was under no compulsion to exercise its
    jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail in a matter or this nature. (9800I   E
             \


          The appropriate course to adopt was to allow the concerned
    Magistrate to deal with the case on the basis of the material before him

-   at the point of time of accused's arrest in case they were arrested. It
    was, therefore, neither pmdent nor proper for the High Court to have
    granted anticipatory bail which order was very likely to occasion pre-       F
    judice by its very nature and timing. [9808-D]

        CRIMINAL         APPELLATE            JURISDICTION:         Criminal
    Appeal No. 22 of 1987.

         From the Judgment and Order dated 29.10.1986 of the Rajas-              G
    than High Court in Crl. M.B.A. No. 1395/86

          Gopal Subramaniam, A.M. Garg and R. Venkataramani for the
    Petitioner.

         Dalveer Bhandari for the Respondents.                                   H

                                      979
    980                  SUPREME COURT REPORTS            (1987] 1 S.C.R.

A         The Judgment of the Court was delivered by                           ...
        THAKKAR, J. The widespread belief that dowry deaths are
  even now treated with some casualness at all levels seems to be well
  grounded. The High Court has granted anticipatory bail in such a
  matter. We are of the opinion that the High Court should not have
B exercised its jurisdiction to release the accused on anticipatory bail in    \
  disregard of the magnitude and seriousness of the matter. The matter
  regarding the unnatural death of the daughter-in-law at the house of
  her father-in-law was still under investigation and the appropriate
  course to adopt was to allow the concerned Magistrate to deal with the
  same on the basis of the material before the Court at the point of time          i --
c of their arrest in case they were arrested. It was neither prudent nor
  proper for the High Court to have granted anticipatory bail which            -1
  order was very likely to occasion prejudice by its very nature and
  timing. We therefore consider it essential to sound a serious note of
  caution for future. The High Court is under no compulsion to exercise
  its jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail in a matter of this nature. So
D far as the present matter is concerned, since it has become infructuous,
  we do not propose to pass any order. Subject to these observations,
  the appeal is dismissed.

    P.S.S.                                               Appeal dismissed.
                                                                                   "