Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail to Bihar Policeman Accused of Extortion.


27 October 2025 Anticipatory Bail >> Criminal Law   |   Extortion >> Criminal Law  

Supreme Court of India, in Bharat Paswan v. State of Bihar (Criminal Appeal No. 4621 of 2025, decided on October 27, 2025), upheld interim protection and extended anticipatory bail to a constable from the Bihar police force who stood accused of extortion, laying stress on cooperation during investigation and the presumption of innocence till trial. The Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan settled the appeal by equating previous interim relief into an absolute safeguard, subject to certain conditions so that a fair probe can be ensured.

The case was initiated on the basis of an FIR filed in August 2024 in Jehanabad Police Station, Bihar, accusing the appellant, who is a police officer in service, of extorting money from truck drivers who carried contraband. The appellant's anticipatory bail application had already been dismissed by the Patna High Court, and this led him to approach the Supreme Court.

 

 

When the issue initially came before the Supreme Court in April 2025, the Court issued interim protection against arrest, asking the appellant to assist the investigation fully. Later proceedings ensured that the State of Bihar did not accuse the appellant of non-cooperation during the investigation. Having noted this fact, the Court held there was no reason to sustain the threat of arrest.

Consequently, the Court converted the interim order into a permanent one and ordered that in three weeks, the appellant should provide bail bonds to the trial court's satisfaction, executing undertakings to (a) assist the investigating agencies and (b) abstain from interfering with witnesses or evidence.

By ordering bail with a reiteration of these conditions, the Bench struck a balance between the accused's rights and the integrity of the investigation. The approach of the Court manifests its persistent view that anticipatory bail is a protection against an unjustified arrest, especially where allegations are controversial and the accused has proven adherence to investigative conditions.

The judgment also emphasizes that public officials, even police officers, are due the same procedural safeguards as other citizens, as long as they are transparent in the judicial process. This pragmatic approach is a reminder that anticipatory bail is not immunity from prosecution, but a conditional assurance against abuse of the arrest power.