Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Ker) 52969
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
K. BABU, J
BAVIN O.T. – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF KERALA – Respondent
Bail Application No. 13665 of 2025
For the Appellants/Petitioners: SHRI.M.SASINDRAN, SHRI.MRINAL CHAND M.
For the Respondents: SRI.M.C.ASHI
Anticipatory bail applications must first be filed in the Sessions Court, respecting the hierarchy of courts.
Headnote:The application for anticipatory bail was filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023. The petitioner directly approached the High Court without justifying exceptional circumstances for bypassing the Sessions Court. The Court highlighted the necessity of first seeking relief from the Sessions Court and ultimately rejected the Bail Application, allowing the petitioner protection from arrest for one week to approach the Sessions Court. The ruling confirms the hierarchy of courts in such matters.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for anticipatory bail under bnss requires approaching the sessions court first. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court grants a week’s protection for the petitioner to approach the sessions court. (Para 3 , 4) |
K.BABU, J.
--------------------------------------
B.A No.13665 of 2025 ---------------------------------------
Dated this the 12th day of November, 2025 O R D E R This is an application seeking anticipatory bail filed under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023.
2. The petitioner has approached this Court directly for pre-arrest bail, without first approaching the Sessions Court for the said relief. The petitioner has not pleaded any exceptional circumstances that prevented him from approaching the Sessions Court concerned. In Mohammed Rasal C v. State of Kerala [Spl. Leave to Appeal (Crl) No.6588/2025], the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed that though concurrent jurisdiction is conferred upon the Sessions Court and the High Court, the hierarchy of Court demands that no person seeking remedy under Section 482 of BNSS should be encouraged to directly approach the High Court. The observation of the Hon'ble Apex Court is extracted below:
“6. We find that in this case, the petitioners had approached the High Court directly for pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (for short, 'BNSS'),, without first approaching the Sessions Court for the said relief. We are of the opinion that though the concurrent jurisdiction is conferred upon the Sessions Court and the High Court to entertain a prayer for pre-arrest bail under Section 482 of the BNSS (formerly, Section 438 CrPC), the hierarchy of Courts demands that no person seeking such remedy should be encouraged or allowed to directly approach the High Court for exercising jurisdiction under Section 482 of the BNSS (formerly, Section 438 CrPC) by bypassing the jurisdiction of the concerned Sessions Court.”
3. In view of the fact that the petitioner has not placed any exceptional circumstances justifying him to directly approach this Court under Section 482 of the BNSS, the Bail Application stands rejected granting liberty to approach the Sessions Court concerned.
4. However, the petitioner is granted protection from arrest for a period of one week from this day for facilitating him to approach the Sessions Court concerned.
If the petitioner makes an application seeking anticipatory bail, the learned Sessions Judge shall pass orders on it untrammelled by the fact that this Court granted protection from arrest for a limited period for facilitating him to approach the Sessions Court concerned.
Sd/-
