The Supreme Court has clarified that an interim order directing that "no coercive steps shall be taken" against an accused does not prohibit the Investigating Officer from filing a charge sheet upon conclusion of the investigation.

The Court observed that an interim protection granted to an accused is only meant to safeguard the liberty of the person seeking anticipatory bail but would not operate as a bar against the filing of a charge sheet.

“…any interim protection granted by this Court in the matter of anticipatory bail does not imply that on conclusion of the investigation if the necessity arises for filing of a charge sheet, the same is also barred. In other words, once the investigation is concluded and charge sheet has to be filed, the I.O. is always at liberty to do so in accordance with law and any interim order granted by any Court during the course of consideration of a case for anticipatory bail would only imply that the liberty of the person seeking anticipatory bail is protected.”, observed a bench of Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan.

The bench was hearing a matter where an interim order had been granted protecting the petitioner from arrest. The State submitted that the investigation was still ongoing and that the petitioner was cooperating with the investigation.

While adjourning the matter, the Court used the occasion to clarify that the grant of an interim protection to an accused would not imply that the filing of charge sheet would be prohibited during the operation of an interim protection. According to the Court, “the interim order would imply that no arrest of the petitioner would be made”, which would not restrain the police from filing the charge sheet who is otherwise continuing with the investigation and taking steps in accordance with the evidence collected during the course of investigation cannot.

Notably, in Satish Kumar Ravi v. State of Jharkhand & Anr. 2024 LiveLaw (SC) 943, a co-ordinate bench in a separate but related matter had taken a contrary view. The court therein, examined the conduct of police officers who had filed a charge sheet despite an interim order directing that no coercive action be taken against the petitioner. While discharging the police officials of contempt proceedings, after their apologies were taken on record, the Court said that a charge sheet cannot be filed after a court passes an interim order restraining the state from taking coercive action against the accused in a criminal case.

Cause Title: ARUN KUMAR MANDAL @ ARUN MANDAL VERSUS THE STATE OF JHARKHAND

Citation : 2026 LiveLaw (SC) 860

Click here to download order

Appearance:

For Petitioner(s) :Mr. Rana Kunal, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Malik, Adv. Mr. Anang Pal Singh, Adv. Mr. Chander Shekhar Ashri, AOR Mr. Rana Kunal, Adv. Mr. Sanjeev Malik, Adv. Mr. Anang Pal Singh, Adv. Ms. Poornima Singh, AOR

For Respondent(s) : Ms. Pallavi Langar, AOR Mr. Sujeet Kumar, Adv. Ms. Madhusmita Bora, AOR Ms. Pavithra V., Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Chechi, Adv.