( 1 ) THESE are the two applications for anticipatory bail on totally diffenent sets of facts. However, because of a common question, they are heard together. The common question is whether the High Court should directly entertain the applications for anticipatory bail or whether the petitioners should be directed to approach the Sessions Court first.

( 2 ) THE petitioner in Misc. Criminal Application No. 1145/86, is a Sub-Accountant in the Central Bank of India and the allegations against him are that he has committed offences of forgery, cheating and misappropriation of funds amounting to Rs. 1,14,000. 87. These offences are alleged to have been committed while the petitioner was discharging his duties as Sub-Accountant and he has been suspended in connection with the same.

( 3 ) IN Misc. Criminal Application No. 1151 of 1986, the allegation against the petitioner is about theft of one jeep belonging to the complainant his uncle. In the complaint dt. 12-3-1986, no name is disclosed as suspect or accused. However, after about a month, another complaint is recorded on 25-4-1986 wherein his uncle Patel Kala Ranchhodbhai has accused the present petitioner for offences punishable under Ss. 379, 506 (2) IPC and has stated that this accused had left the village after the theft of the jeep and the complainant had asked the police to make secret investigation against the petitioner in respect of that jeep and this petitioner on learning the said fact, threatened the complainant. Apprehending arrest by the police in connection with the offence of theft, the petitioner has preferred this application for anticipatory bail. The first matter arises from Kutch District and the second matter arises from Mehsana District. There is no doubt that application for anticipatory bail can be made to the Sessions Court or to the High Court. S. 438 (1) of the Cr. P. C. reads as under : -"when any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail. "

( 4 ) IT is submitted by the learned counsel that there is an option and right to the accused to select either the High Court or the Sessions Court for making an application for anticipatory bail and such an application is maintainable u/s 438 of the Cr. P. C. and it cannot be dismissed on the ground that the application is also maintainable before the Sessions Court.

( 5 ) ON behalf of the State, the learned Addl. Public Prosecutors have submitted that anticipatory bail is urgent and extraordinary remedy. It is urgent both from the point of view of the accused wanting to preserve his liberty as well as from the point of view of police investigation. If the accused is entitled for anticipatory bail, he should get the same urgently because delay in granting anticipatory bail would defeat the very purpose of anticipatory bail. On the other hand, if for granting urgent anticipatory bail, the police wants to oppose the same, they have to satisfy the court by bringing proper material and showing the same to the High Court. For that purpose, Investigating Officer, case papers etc. are required. The Public Prosecutor would certainly require that assistance and sometimes, the Court also may insist for the same. Such anticipatory bail applications would be coming from all the Districts of the State from different police stations and the Investigating Officers would be required to run down to Ahmedabad at the cost of considerable public expenses and public time and putting public machniery to easily avoidable and unnecessary strain. It is, therefore, submitted by the State that there is equally efficacious remedy of anticipatory bail nearer to the accused at the level of the Sessions Court which would be really easily accessible to the accused