The Supreme Court has clarified that once bail has been granted to an accused person in a criminal case, the police cannot arrest that person for a new offence added later without first obtaining the permission of the court that granted bail (or a superior court). This protects the integrity of judicial orders and prevents harassment of the accused through procedural manipulation.
Key Points of the Judgment
If, during the course of proceedings, the prosecution amends or adds a new charge against an accused after bail is already granted, the police are not free to take the person into custody on the strength of that new offence without court approval.
The Court explained that bail — once granted — remains in force unless expressly modified, stayed, or cancelled by a competent court. Arresting someone for a charge added later without permission would circumvent the bail order and allow evasion of judicial safeguards.
The appropriate course is for the investigating agency to apply to the court that granted bail (or to a higher court) to modify the bail terms or cancel bail before carrying out any arrest based on the newly added offence.
Why This Matters
This ruling reinforces the principle that bail is a judicial order, not a police convenience, and that lower courts and investigative agencies must respect the sanctity of bail orders. It ensures that accused persons are not subjected to repeated custodial arrests for related or expanded charges without proper judicial oversight, thus preserving personal liberty and preventing undue harassment.
