Kerala High Court Reaffirms Judicial Hierarchy: Direct Petitions Under S.482 BNSS for Anticipatory Bail Rejected - 2025-10-25

Bypassing the Hierarchy: Kerala High Court Clarifies Procedures for Anticipatory Bail

In a recent order, the Kerala High Court has underscored the importance of respecting judicial hierarchy in criminal matters. Justice K. Babu dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed directly before the High Court under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023, stressing that petitioners must first exhaust their remedies before the Sessions Court.

The Procedural Hurdle

The petitioner, Moosa Thiruvangoth, had bypassed the Sessions Court and invoked the High Court’s jurisdiction seeking pre-arrest protection. However, the court found the move procedurally premature. Justice K. Babu noted that the petitioner failed to demonstrate any "exceptional circumstances" that would justify skipping the lower court.

With the implementation of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita , the High Court is reinforcing that while it shares concurrent jurisdiction with the Sessions Court in bail matters, accessibility should not translate into an abandonment of the established judicial ladder.

Reliance on Apex Court Precedent

The decision relies heavily on the recent observations of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in * Mohammed Rasal C v. State of Kerala *. The High Court reiterated the principle that, while both Courts are empowered to grant relief, the system is designed to function effectively only when parties respect the hierarchy of judicial forums.

Key Observations

The judgment clarifies the stance on direct filings:

• "The hierarchy of Courts demands that no person seeking remedy under S.482 of BNSS should be encouraged to directly approach the High Court."
• "The petitioner has not pleaded any exceptional circumstances that prevented him from approaching the Sessions Court concerned."
• "No person seeking such remedy should be encouraged or allowed to directly approach the High Court for exercising jurisdiction... by bypassing the jurisdiction of the concerned Sessions Court."

The Verdict and Its Impact

While the application for anticipatory bail was rejected due to procedural non-compliance, the Court adopted a pragmatic approach regarding the petitioner's liberty. Understanding the potential urgency of the situation, the Court granted the petitioner two weeks of protection from arrest . This window allows the petitioner sufficient time to properly approach the Sessions Court for the necessary relief.

This ruling serves as a stern reminder to legal practitioners: procedural shortcuts will not be permitted in high-stakes criminal matters. By enforcing this hierarchy, the Court ensures that the judicial system remains organized and that lower courts are given the first opportunity to resolve grievances within their jurisdiction. Practitioners should henceforth ensure that exceptional circumstances are clearly articulated before attempting to leapfrog the Sessions Court in bail proceedings under the new BNSS regime.