Supreme Court Asks HCs, Centre & States/UTs To Comply With Directions To Prevent Unnecessary Arrests & Remand

The Division Bench of Justices MM Sundresh and SVN Bhatti was hearing an application, filed in the main matter of Satender Kumar Antil, for compliance with the directions issued. It may be recalled that in this landmark case, the Top Court had passed certain directions to prevent unnecessary arrest and remand.

One of the directions passed was strict compliance with the mandate in Siddharth v. State of UP. In this case, the Court held that the investigating officer need not arrest each and every accused at the time of filing the chargesheet. It was also observed that the practice of some trial courts insisting on the arrest of an accused as a prerequisite formality to take the charge sheet on record is misplaced.

The High Courts were directed to undertake the exercise of finding out the undertrial prisoners who are not able to comply with the bail conditions. After doing so, appropriate action was directed to be taken in light of Section 440 of the Code, facilitating the release.

 In pursuant to this, the Top Court has time and again passed orders to comply with these directions. One such order was passed last year, wherein the Court directed the inclusion of these landmark decisions in the curriculum of judicial academies.

Previously, the Court had directed the High Courts to inform whether the decisions taken in Siddharth v. State of UP, (2022) 1 SCC 676 and Satender Kumar have been included in the curriculum of the judicial academy.

Further, the States were directed to ensure that the prosecutors were stating the correct position of law as outlined in these judgments. Besides, the States were asked to circulate these judgments and train the prosecutors on a periodic basis.

In its instant order, the Court has expressed its displeasure at the parties for not complying with the earlier directions despite being given sufficient time. The Court termed the situation as "unfortunate". The Division Bench also made it clear that while they are deferring from passing any adverse orders, consequences will follow if the due compliance is not reported by the next date of hearing.

"Learned counsel appearing for the non-complying parties made a fervent plea that due compliance will be made by the next date of hearing. Considering the said submissions, we are deferring from passing any adverse orders. We make it clear that if the due compliance is not reported by the next date of hearing, the consequence will follow."

In view of this, the Top Court has granted time up to June 30, 2024, to the non-complying parties to file their compliance affidavits.

“While doing so, they should take into consideration the non-compliance as indicated by the learned Amicus. We also facilitate the High Courts, the States, the Union of India and the Union Territories to have a discussion with the learned Amicus through video conferencing. A link will be sent to them in order to facilitate a discussion between 5.30 PM to 6.30 PM on 15th, 18th, and the 19th of July, 2024 for the purpose of due compliance, if not already made, as submitted by the learned Amicus.,” the Court added in its order.

Before parting, the Court made it clear that the aforesaid communication must be via an email ID (complianceinantil@gmail.com) that has been already intimated to the concerned parties. Stating thus, the Court posted the matter to August 6 at 2PM.

Case Title: Satender Kumar Antil v. Central Bureau of Investigation

Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 151

Click here to read/ download the order