The Supreme Court has recently reversed a controversial decision by the Jharkhand High Court. The case involved an appellant challenging a condition set by the High Court for the grant of an anticipatory bail. The High Court had mandated the appellant to 'resume conjugal life' as a prerequisite for granting anticipatory bail.

The appellant, dissatisfied with this condition, sought modification under Section 482 Cr.P.C. The original order compelled the appellant to bring his wife to his residence, ensuring her dignified maintenance for the grant of anticipatory bail.

Arguing that the requirement to resume conjugal life was inappropriate for anticipatory bail, the appellant's plea for modification was rejected by the High Court. The High Court, in its contested order, cited the appellant's alleged persistent refusal to resume conjugal life.

However, a Supreme Court bench comprising Hon'ble Ms. Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Hon'ble Mr. Justice Satish Chandra Sharma identified a flaw in the High Court's condition for anticipatory bail. The Court disagreed with the rationale behind dismissing the appellant's plea, stating that such a condition should not have been imposed during the grant of anticipatory bail and should not have been a basis for rejecting the petition.

Consequently, the Supreme Court overturned the challenged order issued by the High Court. The Court directed that if the appellant faces arrest in connection with the Section 498A complaint in the Indian Penal Code (IPC), he should be granted bail with conditions to be determined by the Chief Judicial Magistrate.

Case: Kunal Choudhary vs. The State of Jharkhand & Anr.,

Criminal Appeal No. 3701 of 2023.

Click to read/download judgment.