R. ELAVAZHAGAN @ BABU v. PANKAJAM VILWANATHAN

Supreme Court of India · 31 Jan 2017
Kurian Joseph; A. M. Khanwilkar
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs. 204-205 OF 2017
criminal appeal_dismissed

AI Summary

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal and held that an accused on regular bail must cooperate with further investigation and custodial interrogation ordered by the court, failing which bail may be cancelled.

Full Text
Translation output
Page 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NOs. 204-205 OF 2017
[ @ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NO. 7088-7089 OF 2012 ]
R.ELAVAZHAGAN @ BABU Appellant(s)
VERSUS
PANKAJAM VILWANATHAN & ORS. Respondent(s)
JUDGMENT
KURIAN, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant has mainly two grievances- i)Though the appellant was on regular bail, the High Court, in the impugned order, has directed cancellation of the anticipatory bail and custodial interrogation; ii)There is a direction in the impugned order for further investigation.

3. It is an undisputed position that the appellant has been on regular bail while the High Court passed the impugned order.

4. In that view of the matter, in our view, nothing survives in this appeal since the appellant cannot, in any way, stall the further investigation, as ordered by the High Court in the impugned order. Page 2

5. Therefore, these appeals are disposed of making it clear that the appellant shall cooperate with the investigation and in case, there is non-cooperation on the part of the appellant, it will be open to the Investigating Officer to seek for cancellation of the regular bail ........................ J. [ KURIAN JOSEPH ] ....................... J. [ A. M. KHANWILKAR ] New Delhi; January 31, 2017.