The Allahabad High Court has held that the issuance of a proclamation under Section 82 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), declaring an accused as absconding, does not automatically bar the consideration of their anticipatory bail application, especially when compelling personal circumstances exist.
Justice Gautam Chowdhary granted anticipatory bail to one Monika, a nurse by profession, in a criminal case registered under serious charges including Section 316 (causing death of quick unborn child), Section 420 (cheating), Section 504 (insult to provoke breach of peace), Section 120-B (criminal conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code, and relevant provisions of the Medical Council Act.
The Court noted that Monika was “in family way” and had actually delivered a male child on October 6, 2025, just days before a non-bailable warrant was issued against her on October 10, 2025. The High Court observed:
“It is not as if in all cases that there will be a total embargo on considering the application for grant of anticipatory bail. In the present case, at the time when certain processes were issued against the applicant, she was in family way and was unable to appear before the court concerned. This Court finds it a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.”
The case was registered when the applicant was serving as a nurse in a hospital. The prosecution alleged her involvement in an incident leading to the death of a quick unborn child. Counsel for the informant objected to the anticipatory bail plea on the ground that both an NBW and a proclamation under Sections 82 and 83 CrPC had been issued against her, and hence her application was not maintainable.
In response, Monika’s counsel argued that she was a midwife nurse working under the supervision of a co-accused and had no direct involvement in the alleged incident. It was also contended that the chargesheet had already been filed in November 2024 and cognizance taken in May 2025.
Importantly, the defense highlighted Monika’s medical condition at the time of issuance of coercive processes, stating that she had delivered a child just four days before the NBW was issued.
The Court rejected the blanket proposition that issuance of proclamation under Section 82 CrPC always bars the grant of anticipatory bail. It clarified that each case must be examined on its own facts.
Justice Chowdhary emphasized that the applicant’s physical condition and circumstances at the time of issuance of the proclamation justified the grant of anticipatory bail in this instance.
