FACTS- First Information Report bearing No. 05/2023 dated 15.06.2023 came to be registered with the Vigilance Police Station, Chandigarh against the appellant and other co-accused for the offences punishable under Sections 419, 465, 468 and 471 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 7-C of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. After the Trial Court and High Court denied the anticipatory to the accused/appellant, he preferred a plea before the Supreme Court seeking anticipatory bail in connection with the aforesaid offences.

ISSUE- Whether Anticipatory Bail Can Be Denied On Mere Assertion Of State That Custodial Interrogation Of Accused Is Required?

OBSERVATION-The Supreme Court observed the State cannot oppose the bail plea citing the requirement of custodial interrogation unless the State proves that why the custodial interrogation of the accused is required for investigation. Further, the court also clarified that just because the custodial interrogation isn't required it wouldn't preclude the court from denying the anticipatory bail to the accused.

Supreme Court held that anticipatory bail can't be denied merely because the custody of the accused is required by the State for custodial interrogation.