Bail can’t be denied on the basis of ‘merits as punishment’: Delhi Court

A Delhi court has granted release to an accused in an extortion case, stating that ‘bail cannot be denied by taking merits into consideration as a punishment’. Anuj Srivastava, who was accused of extorting money from an 85-year-old man by threatening to falsely accuse him of rape, was given the relief by Special Judge Shailender Malik. The judge granted the bail request on a personal bond of Rs 30,000 with one surety in the same amount. He also issued orders prohibiting him from leaving the country without first obtaining permission from the court, contacting or influencing witnesses, and tampering with evidence.

‘Having reviewed the submissions and taken notice that the applicant/accused has been in judicial custody for the last three months and is no longer needed in the inquiry’. According to established legal precedent, bail is a rule and its rejection is an exception; it cannot be rejected by considering its merits as a punishment. The accused/applicant is permitted to bail, the court stated, taking into account the length of the accused’s incarceration.

According to the prosecution’s evidence, the accused received a credit for Rs. 4 lakh from the complainant as payment for extortion. The complainant claims that in August 2022, he got offensive images and videos on his WhatsApp number along with a request for a payment of money, failing which he would be unjustly accused. He asserted that he began making deposits because he started to dread getting a poor reputation in the community after giving in to blackmail. After being robbed of a significant sum of money, he eventually went to the police.

The charge sheet had already been submitted and the accused had requested relief on the grounds that the investigation into the matter was complete. He claimed that the inquiry was concluded and that he had been in judicial custody for more than three months. He also claimed that other co-accused had previously been given release. By arguing that the co-situation accused’s was entirely different from the one of the current applicant, the prosecution rejected the bail application.