Blanket Order Of Protection From Arrest Cannot Be Passed By High Court While Dismissing A Petition U/s 482 CrPC: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that a blanket order of protection from arrest cannot be passed by the High Court while dismissing a petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure seeking quashing of FIR.

The issue raised in this appeal was whether the High Court of Andhra Pradesh was justified in passing a blanket direction restraining the police from arresting the accused while at the same time having come to the conclusion that there was no merit in the petition for quashing under Section 482.

In this case, the High Court, while dismissing the petition seeking to quash FIR,  proceeded to issue a blanket restraint against the arrest of the accused by directing that the police would complete the investigation and file a final report in accordance with law. The allegation against the accused duo (who were advocate and client) was that they colluded to fabricate a sale deed in respect of the property and that the records in a suit were tampered with by fabricating an ex-parte judgment and decree.

The Apex court observed that such a direction by the High Court has the effect of impeding the course of the investigation and has no basis or justification in law. Referring to State of Telangana vs. Habib Abdullah Jeelani, the bench said:

"The petition under section 482 was for quashing the FIR. The High Court found no substance in the petition. The matter should have ended there. The order restraining arrest was not in aid of further proceedings. Indeed, the proceedings were at an end once the High Court declined to quash the FIR. A person in the position of the third respondent has remedies available under the Code of Criminal Procedure to protect his liberty by either seeking anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 or applying for regular bail under Section 439. A blanket direction of the nature which has been issued by the High Court would completely dislocate the investigation and cause a serious obstruction in the enforcement of criminal justice. Such an order ought not to have been passed by the High Court.", the bench comprising Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah observed.

The court further noted that there is no justification given in the order of the High Court for issuing such a direction. "The High Court has been oblivious to the serious nature of the allegations, involving the tampering of a judicial record. We disapprove of the course followed by the High Court. It has no foundation in law.", the bench observed while allowing the appeal.

Case: Ravuri Krishna Murthy vs. State of Telangana [Crl.A.274-275/2021]

Coram: Justices DY Chandrachud and MR Shah

Counsel: Adv G.V.R. Choudary, Adv Bina Madhwan, Adv Anukul Raj

Citation: LL 2021 SC 150

Click here to Read/Download Judgment

Read Judgment