In Brief
This landmark five-judge Supreme Court judgment settles conflicting interpretations of Section 438 CrPC on anticipatory bail. The court held that courts should not invariably limit anticipatory bail to a fixed period; it should generally continue until trial ends. While standard conditions under Section 437(3) with 438(2) should be imposed, restrictive time-based conditions are discretionary, not mandatory. The court overruled decisions requiring time limits or surrender upon charge-sheet filing. Anticipatory bail does not automatically end when the accused is summoned or charges are framed; courts retain discretion under Section 439(2) to intervene if conditions are violated. The judgment reaffirms the wide discretion granted by Gurbakhsh Singh Sibbia while balancing investigative needs through standard conditions and 'deemed custody' provisions.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.