On September 3, 2025, the Supreme Court granted anticipatory bail to Gursewak Singh, who faced arrest in a 2021 corruption case, while sharply criticizing the Punjab and Haryana High Court for its “cryptic and unusual” handling of his bail plea. A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Sandeep Mehta observed that the High Court should have decided the anticipatory bail application on merits rather than issuing directions to the police, stating: “We do not approve the manner in which the High Court has dealt with the plea of the anticipatory bail. Either the High Court should have allowed the application granting anticipatory bail or should have declined it on its own merits.”
The case involves FIR No. 05/2021 registered at the Economic Offence Branch Police Station, District Ludhiana, Punjab, alleging offenses under Sections 7 and 7A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, and Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Singh, the petitioner, approached the High Court fearing arrest after receiving a summons from the Deputy Commissioner to appear before the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Economic Offence Branch. The High Court, in its July 25, 2025, order, did not address the bail plea directly but instructed the Director General of Police, Punjab, to file an affidavit explaining why no chargesheet under Section 173(2) CrPC had been submitted against arrested co-accused and why Singh had not been arrested in four years, adjourning the matter to August 11, 2025. The order read: “The DGP, Punjab shall file an affidavit as to why the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. has not been submitted against the arrested accused and why the petitioner has not been arrested for the last four years. Let the needful be done by the next date of hearing. Adjourned to 11.08.2025.”
Challenging this, Singh filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court. The bench questioned the timing of his 2025 bail plea for a 2021 FIR, to which his counsel explained that Singh believed no case existed against him, as no arrest attempts were made, his suspension was revoked on September 27, 2023, and he was reinstated in service. The apprehension arose only upon receiving the recent summons.
The Supreme Court highlighted that the High Court’s query to the investigating agency about the delay in arrest was misplaced, noting: “One another aspect of the matter we need to highlight is that while considering the plea for anticipatory bail why should the High Court ask a question to the investigating agency as to why the accused had not been arrested for the last four years. The fact that the petitioner was not arrested for four years by itself was a good ground for the High Court to exercise its discretion and order grant of anticipatory bail.” The bench also pointed out the inconsistency in the High Court granting anticipatory bail to a co-accused allegedly involved in accepting the bribe, while delaying Singh’s plea.
In the interest of expediency, the Supreme Court disposed of the petition without remanding it to the High Court, directing: “In the event of the arrest of the petitioner in connection with First Information Report No.05/2021 registered with Economic Offence Branch Police Station, District Ludhiana, Punjab, he shall be released on bail subject to the terms and conditions that the Investigating Officer may deem fit to impose.”
This ruling underscores the need for courts to adjudicate anticipatory bail pleas promptly on merits, rather than seeking explanations from investigative agencies that could inadvertently favor the accused due to procedural delays.
Case Details: Gursewak Singh v. State of Punjab | Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 11234/2025
Click Here for Full Judgment
Lawcutor 