Jurisdiction of High Courts on anticipatory bail


Dear Members,

There is a lot of controversy over the question as to the High Court, which a person may apply when the offence is committed in one jurisdiction and the accused resides in another jurisdiction.but this seems to be settled nw and another court where the accused resides shall have jurisdiction to grant ab. we may take a recent judgment of Delhi HC grating bail to Varun Gandhi.

The Calcutta10, Karnataka11, Bombay12, and Patna13HighCourts have held that there is no bar to the applicant asking for an anticipatory bailfrom the court within whose jurisdiction he is apprehending arrest. On the otherhand the Punjab14, J&K15, Kerala and MP High Courts have held that bail andanticipatory bail are mere ancillary matters to the whole trial procedure. So, in theabsence of any specific guidelines in s. 438, the general rule under s. 177 must apply.Thus only the high court within whose jurisdiction the offence was committed andwhich has the jurisdiction to try the case is competent to grant the anticipatory bail.It is submitted that s. 438 is a provision to preserve individual liberty and thatconferring competence only on the courts within whose jurisdiction the offence was committed would amount to a lot of hardship to the applicant. But in the absence ofany specific legislative guideline, the general rule must be applied.

9Ramesh Chandra vs. State of Gujarat, 1988 Cri LJ 210 (Gujarat).10B.R. Sinha vs. State of West Bengal, 1982 Cri LJ 61 (Cal).11Naidu vs. State of Karnataka, 1984 Cri LJ 757 (Kant).12N.K. Nayar vs.State of Maharashtra, 1985 Cri LJ 1887 (Bombay).13Syed Zafrul vs. State of Bihar, AIR 1986 Pat 194.14Ravinder vs. State of Punjab, 1984 Cri LJ 714 (Punj and Har).15Mohan vs. State (1983) Cri LJ 1182 (J & K

Total likes : 2 times


good thread start Manish Ji.


in addition the concept of TRANSIT BAIL must be discussed.


i ll bring some more judgments in this context.



Thanks Mr. Kiran,

Actually we were really in dilemma on the above said point and somehw i came across these observations so i thought to put it dwn here for opinions of you learned members as some more facts may crop up during the discussion.



Application for A.B. can be moved in the Sessions Court and High Court in which jurisdiction the petitioner ordinarily living and where he has reasonably apprension for his arrest in a non bailable offence and in the Court of Sessions Judge and High Court in whoes jurisdiction the offence is committed. If the residence of accused is in other than the Sessions Judge or High Court's jurisdiction in whoes jurisdiction crime is committed and case is registered than the Sessions Judge or High Court in whoes jurisdiction accused resides can pass transit/temporery anticipatery bail order for a particular period to secure his personsl liberty and can direct him for filing A.B. application in the court in whoes jurisdiction the offence is committed where the public prosecuter can procure and produce all relevent material befor the court .   

Law officer

Thanks Manish

 Mr.Manish , there are few land mark judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme court such as Gurbaksh singh Sibbia V/s State of Punjab (AIR 1980 SC 1632) and one unreported judgement of  its own court titled as Pritam Singh V/s State of Punjab (1981) 19 DLT 300. The decision in Samunder singh V/s state of Rajasthana (AIR 1987 SC 737 and Kiran Devi V/s State of Rajasthan(1988 SCC(Cri) 106) will passify your legal thrust about jurisdictional issue

. Bhupender Sharma (Adv.) 




Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register  


  Search Forum



Post a Suggestion for LCI Team
Post a Legal Query
Muslim Personal Law     |    x