Kerala High Court has ruled that in cases where the accused leaves the country while fully knowing of a non-bailable charge registered against him/her, it may not be suitable to grant anticipatory bail.

The factual background of the case 

In the case of Anu Mathew V State of Kerala, an accused was charged with altering pictures of a young child, posting them on a pornographic website, sending threatening messages, and defaming both the little girl and her mother. The accused fled away from India and filed an Anticipatory application under section 438 of Cr.P.C before a Kerala High Court.

Issue

whether an accused person would be eligible for interim bail under Section 438 (1) of the Cr.P.C. if they fled India after knowing that a non-bailable offence had been registered against them.

Kerala High Court Judgement 

The Bench Comprise Justice Alexander Thomas and Justice C S Sudha noted that “If such an accused had fled India and travelled abroad knowing full well that a crime had been registered in respect of a non-bailable offence, then after, though he may technically have the locus standi to maintain a pre-arrest bail plea, if as a matter of fact, the Court is convinced that he has absconded and fled away from the law enforcement agencies, etc., then it may not be a right and proper exercise of jurisdiction to grant interim bail to such a person.”

Further, The court noted that when a bail application is being considered by an accused who is abroad, courts must take into account adding the requirements that the accused must be available for questioning by a police officer whenever necessary and must not leave India without the court’s prior approval and hence, therefore the court had dismissed the anticipatory bail application.