Antipatory Bail in Indian Penal Code (IPC) : Section 399 and 402 : Preparation and assembly for dacoity – in Punjab and Haryana High Court at Chandigarh

Understanding Anticipatory Bail Under IPC Sections 399 and 402

Anticipatory bail refers to the legal provision that allows a person to seek bail in anticipation of an arrest on accusation of having committed a non-bailable offense. Under the Indian Penal Code (IPC), sections 399 and 402 deal with the criminally cognizable offence of dacoity, which is the act of committing robbery by a group of five or more individuals. Section 399 covers the preparation to commit dacoity, whereas section 402 pertains to the assembly for the purpose of committing dacoity.

In the context of anticipatory bail, individuals who apprehend their arrest under these specific provisions can file for it. The apprehension could be based on the direct accusation or being indirectly implicated during an investigation due to association with the primary suspects. Anticipatory bail is thus a critical legal remedy for anyone who believes they may soon face legal repercussions for alleged activities related to dacoity, as outlined in sections 399 and 402 of the IPC.

The relevant law outlining the provision for anticipatory bail is contained within Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. This section empowers the High Court or Court of Session to grant anticipatory bail if it feels that the individual may be wrongfully implicated or when the courts believe that the accused will not hamper the investigation or evade the course of justice. Some key considerations for the court while granting anticipatory bail under these IPC sections include the gravity of the alleged offence, the role of the person in the offence, likelihood of the applicant’s influence on witnesses or the evidence, and the person’s criminal record, if any.

It must also be noted that the provision of anticipatory bail is not a blanket protection and comes with certain conditions. The court may impose conditions such as a mandate for the accused to make themselves available for interrogation, not to leave the country without the court’s permission, or not to indulge in similar activity. Importantly, anticipatory bail becomes effective only once the individual has been arrested, and until then, it acts as a shield against sudden arrest on the basis of mere accusations without factual substantiation.

Therefore, understanding anticipatory bail in relation to IPC sections 399 and 402 is crucial for anyone seeking this legal provision to protect their liberty against unfounded accusations of dacoity. It brings an element of fairness and security, allowing the accused to maintain a semblance of normalcy in their personal and professional lives while cooperating with the legal process.

Legal Precedents and Judgments in Punjab and Haryana High Court

The history of court judgments concerning anticipatory bail, specifically within the purview of sections 399 and 402 of the IPC, in the Punjab and Haryana High Court, reveals a deliberate and cautious approach taken by the judiciary. This judicial caution reflects the balance courts strive to maintain between the liberty of the individual and the interests of society. Through various precedents, the High Court has made it abundantly clear that while anticipatory bail is a provision to safeguard individual freedom, it should not be misused to hinder the course of justice or to evade arrest following involvement in serious offences such as dacoity.

An analysis of noteworthy judgments will disclose patterns in the legal reasoning adopted by the Punjab and Haryana High Court. For instance, the court has often reiterated that anticipatory bail is not to be granted as a matter of routine and should be reserved for cases where there is a discernible indication of mala fide intent on the part of the police or the complainant. Furthermore, the court has been known to consider factors such as the severity of the offence, the applicant’s past criminal conduct, the possibility of the applicant to flee justice, and potential threats to witnesses.

One of the landmark judgments that dealt exhaustively with anticipatory bail within the context of dacoity charges underlined that:

“The provision of anticipatory bail enshrined in Section 438 CrPC is a device to secure the individual’s liberty; however, it is neither absolute nor to be awarded in a vacuum without a careful examination of the events and their potential impact on society.”

In more specific terms, the court has, on various occasions, laid down explicit conditions for grant of anticipatory bail in relation to dacoity charges. These conditions often include:

  • Strict reporting to a police station at designated intervals.
  • Cooperating with the police during the investigation.
  • Providing assurances to not influence witnesses or tamper with evidence.

It is also not uncommon for the court to deny anticipatory bail where there is a strong suspicion of the applicant’s involvement in the planning or commission of the crime. The underlying principle guiding such decisions is that persons accused of grave and heinous crimes like dacoity must not be allowed an unfettered right to thwart justice.

In all cases, judgments from the Punjab and Haryana High Court contribute significantly to the evolving jurisprudence on anticipatory bail. Each decision not only impacts the immediate case but also shapes the manner in which lower courts and future benches will address the complex matters involving anticipatory bail, especially in the serious context of dacoity. Accordingly, legal practitioners and individuals seeking anticipatory bail must be well-versed with these legal precedents to navigate their case appropriately within the realms of the law.

The Procedure for Obtaining Anticipatory Bail for Dacoity Charges

To secure anticipatory bail for dacoity charges under sections 399 and 402 of the IPC, an individual must follow a multi-step legal procedure that involves the High Court or Court of Session. This process begins with the preparation of an application that details the reasons for the apprehension of arrest and the grounds on which the bail should be granted. The application must succinctly outline the applicant’s case demonstrating that they are not likely to abscond or tamper with evidence and are willing to comply with any conditions imposed by the court.

  • The applicant must engage a lawyer with profound knowledge of criminal law and the nuances of anticipatory bail.
  • The lawyer drafts an anticipatory bail application detailing the applicant’s version of the facts, potential charges, reasons for apprehension of arrest, and other relevant grounds justifying the need for bail.
  • This application is then filed in the appropriate court — the High Court or the Court of Session.
  • Upon receiving the application, the court will schedule a hearing wherein both the prosecution and the defense will be given the opportunity to present their cases. During this hearing, the prosecution might oppose the bail citing the seriousness of the offense and the potential for the accused to evade the legal process or influence witnesses.
  • The court, after hearing both parties and considering the facts and circumstances, along with the individual’s criminal antecedents and the likelihood of them fleeing, will decide whether to grant anticipatory bail.
  • If granted, the bail order will include conditions that the applicant must adhere to. These could range from surrendering their passport, ensuring their availability for interrogation, to prohibitions on contacting co-accused or victims.
  • In the event that the court denies the anticipatory bail, the applicant can seek relief from a superior court. However, this also means an imminent risk of arrest until such time as bail is granted by the higher judiciary.

Throughout this process, the burden is on the applicant to convince the court that their liberty should not be curtailed and that they will abide by the legal procedures and conditions set by the court. The court’s decision will be influenced by the standing laws, the nature and gravity of the offense, the available evidence, and the precedents set by higher courts.

Applicants often are required to provide sureties or bail bonds as a guarantee for their appearance in court as and when required. The amount and nature of the surety or bond are determined by the court based on the specifics of the case and the accused’s financial condition.

It is crucial for applicants to understand that after securing anticipatory bail, if they are arrested, they must produce the bail order to the concerned police officer. Failure to comply with any of the conditions can result in the cancellation of anticipatory bail and immediate arrest.

In cases where the course of justice might be impeded, the court retains the discretion to revoke anticipatory bail. Misuse of the granted relief or involvement in additional offenses likewise can lead to annulment of the bail. Hence, the process of obtaining anticipatory bail, especially for serious charges like dacoity, requires a careful legal approach backed by solid evidence and argumentation to convince the court that the applicant deserves the relief sought.


List of Most Recommended Lawyers:


1. Advocate Vikram Mehta
  • Experience: more than 20 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

2. Advocate Saanvi Shah
  • Experience: more than 25 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

3. Advocate Krish Mehra
  • Experience: more than 35 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

4. Advocate Kabir Gupta
  • Experience: more than 40 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

5. Advocate Neil Chopra
  • Experience: more than 30 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

6. Advocate Diya Verma
  • Experience: more than 50 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

7. Advocate Kabir Mehra
  • Experience: more than 30 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

8. Advocate Ishika Joshi
  • Experience: more than 25 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

9. Advocate Ahaan Sharma
  • Experience: more than 20 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer

10. Advocate Reyansh Khanna
  • Experience: more than 45 years
  • Expertise: Quashing matters
  • Practice Area: Criminal Lawyer