Sessions Court, High Courts Can Grant Interim/Transit Anticipatory Bail Even When FIR Lodged Outside State: SC
Principle Overview
When a First Information Report (FIR) is lodged outside a particular jurisdiction or state, a person apprehending arrest in connection with that FIR may seek interim anticipatory bail or transit bail from courts in their own jurisdiction to avoid immediate arrest while arrangements for transfer or proper jurisdictional procedures take place.
The law recognizes the right to seek interim protection from arrest even if the FIR is registered outside the jurisdiction, and courts at the Sessions and High Court level have the power to grant such reliefs to ensure protection of personal liberty and prevent unnecessary harassment.
Detailed Explanation
Interim/Transit Bail Defined
Interim Bail: Temporary bail granted during the pendency of the anticipatory bail application.
Transit Bail: Bail granted to a person arrested in one jurisdiction when the case relates to another jurisdiction, allowing safe transit to the appropriate court.
Jurisdictional Challenges
FIR lodged outside the state/jurisdiction may cause procedural challenges for accused.
Immediate arrest can cause unnecessary hardship and affect liberty.
Courts in the accused’s local jurisdiction can grant protection until the matter is transferred or the concerned court takes cognizance.
Constitutional Safeguard
Article 21 of the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to life and liberty.
The courts use their powers to prevent misuse of arrest and custodial detention by granting anticipatory or transit bail even when FIR is outside their territorial jurisdiction.
Power of Sessions and High Courts
Sessions Courts and High Courts have inherent jurisdiction to grant interim anticipatory bail to safeguard the accused's liberty.
This power is exercised keeping in mind the interests of justice and the facts of each case.
Important Case Laws
1. Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab, (2014) 2 SCC 92
The Supreme Court held that a Sessions Court or High Court has the jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail even if the FIR is registered outside its territorial jurisdiction.
The Court emphasized the importance of personal liberty and the role of courts in protecting it from arbitrary arrest.
2. Surinder Singh v. State of Haryana, AIR 1966 SC 454
The Supreme Court held that transit anticipatory bail can be granted by courts where the accused apprehends arrest, regardless of where the FIR is lodged.
The Court stressed that this protects individuals from arbitrary or unlawful arrest while ensuring the due process of law.
3. State of Rajasthan v. Balchand @ Baliay, (2020) 6 SCC 475
The Supreme Court reiterated the power of High Courts and Sessions Courts to grant interim or transit anticipatory bail even if the FIR is outside their jurisdiction.
The Court held that such power must be exercised judiciously to protect liberty without compromising investigation.
4. Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, (2012) 1 SCC 40
While this case mainly deals with anticipatory bail principles, the Supreme Court recognized the broad jurisdictional scope of Sessions Courts and High Courts to grant anticipatory bail.
Courts must consider the facts and circumstances of each case, including FIR location.
5. State of Maharashtra v. Abhinav Satyawan Bhosale, (2019) 11 SCC 708
The Court clarified that courts have the authority to grant transit bail or anticipatory bail as a measure to protect liberty and facilitate smooth judicial process, irrespective of FIR location.
Summary and Legal Position
Sessions Courts and High Courts have jurisdiction to grant interim/transit anticipatory bail even if the FIR is lodged outside their territorial jurisdiction.
This power protects the accused from unnecessary arrest and custodial harassment while respecting the ongoing investigation.
The courts must balance the right to liberty of the accused with the interests of the investigation and public justice.
Such reliefs are granted on merits, considering the seriousness of allegations, evidence, and circumstances.
This principle ensures effective judicial protection of personal liberty across states and jurisdictions.
RELATED Blog
0 comments