Pre-Arrest Bail Should Be Denied to Economic Offenders, Says Delhi High Court and Pitches for Law Amendment
The Delhi High Court on Tuesday said an amendment in the existing law was needed to restrict the provisions of pre-arrest bail and make it inapplicable to offenders of high-profile economic offences like the INX Media scam, in which Congress leader P Chidambaram was denied anticipatory bail on the ground that he was the kingpin of the case.
New Delhi, August 21: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday said an amendment in the existing law was needed to restrict the provisions of pre-arrest bail and make it inapplicable to offenders of high-profile economic offences like the INX Media scam, in which Congress leader P Chidambaram was denied anticipatory bail on the ground that he was the kingpin of the case.
Justice Sunil Gaur, who is due to retire on Thursday, said pre-arrest bail is not meant for high-profile economic offenders and lawmakers cannot be allowed to turn into lawbreakers with impunity, particularly in cases of this magnitude.
"What is so far to be seen is the tip of the iceberg. Pre-arrest (bail) is not meant for high-profile economic offenders. P Chidambaram Gets No Immediate Relief From Supreme Court, ED Issues Lookout Notice Against Former FM.
Time has come to recommend to Parliament to suitably amend the law to restrict the provisions of pre-arrest bail and make it inapplicable to economic offenders of high-profile cases like the instant one. It is the need of the hour," the high court said in its 24-page judgment denying bail to the former Union minister in the INX media corruption and money-laundering cases.
The court said the law must come down on economic offenders with a heavy hand. "It is often seen that when economic offenders are on pre-arrest bail, the investigation conducted is at a superficial level, like in the instant case.
This not only weakens the mega scam cases but it actually stifles the prosecution. This court cannot permit the prosecution in this sensitive case to end up in smoke like it has happened in some other high-profile cases," it said.
The court further said it was conscious of the fact that the personal liberty of a citizen was sacrosanct, but no one was above the law.
(This is an unedited and auto-generated story from Syndicated News feed, LatestLY Staff may not have modified or edited the content body)