VIVEK BHARTI SHARMA
Ashu Tyagi – Appellant
Versus
State of Uttarakhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Vivek Bharti Sharma, J.—Applicant Ashu Tyagi is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR/Case Crime No. 0054 of 2023, under Sections 419 & 420 IPC, Police Station Vikasnagar, District Dehradun.
2. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
3. Learned State Counsel would argue that applicant has an equally efficacious remedy available to file the anticipatory bail application before the Sessions Court. She would further argue that instead of approaching the Sessions Court, the applicant/accused has directly come before this High Court without exhausting equally efficacious remedy available before Sessions Court.
4. She would further submit that the issue regarding entertainability of anticipatory bail application before the High Court u/s 438 of Cr.P.C. is pending consideration before the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1562/2017 Gauhati High Court Bar Association vs. State of Assam and Others, wherein the issue raised before the Hon’ble Supreme Court is that “Whether the High Court exercising jurisdiction under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has discretion not to entertain such an application on the ground that the applicant must f
Application for grant of anticipatory bail directly in High Court without first approaching Sessions Court is certainly maintainable – However, if anticipatory bail applications are entertained in ea....
The High Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the Sessions Court to grant anticipatory bail but should generally require applicants to first seek relief from the Sessions Court unless exceptional c....
The High Court retains discretion to entertain anticipatory bail applications directly, but encourages applicants to first approach the Sessions Court unless exceptional circumstances exist.
The High Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the Sessions Court to grant anticipatory bail, but should only entertain direct applications in exceptional circumstances.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the jurisdiction for entertaining prayer for anticipatory bail is concurrent in nature between the High Court and the Court of Sessions. Addit....
Anticipatory bail applications under S.438 must typically be filed in the Sessions Court first, unless exceptional circumstances are demonstrated.
Anticipatory bail – High Court exercises concurrent jurisdiction along with Sessions Court insofar as grant of anticipatory bail, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, is con....
A party may not apply for anticipatory bail after rejection by the Sessions Court on the same grounds, but retains the right to seek judicial review.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.