In Brief
A woman appealed against a High Court order granting anticipatory bail to a police officer accused of raping and sexually exploiting her over two years, along with charges of theft, wrongful restraint, and criminal force. The Supreme Court held that anticipatory bail orders must be confined to specific offences and should not provide blanket protection. The Court found the High Court erred by accepting the accused's version as true without properly evaluating the grave allegations and ongoing investigative needs, including recovery of evidence. The Court set aside the anticipatory bail, holding that such serious offences combined with the accused's non-cooperation and police officer status warranted refusal of pre-arrest protection.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.