HCs, session courts can grant bail despite FIR in different state, says SC

New Delhi, Nov 20 – The Supreme Court on Monday pronounced a judgement that the High Courts and Sessions Courts can give transit anticipatory bail to the accused even if the FIR is registered in a different state.

A bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan was hearing a case related to dowry demand complaint filed by a woman in Rajasthan in which the husband was granted anticipatory bail by a Bengaluru district court.

The top court ruled that HCs or sessions courts can entertain and grant transit anticipatory bail to an accused even though the crime was not committed within its jurisdiction and the interim protection would continue till accused approaches the jurisdictional court.

The apex court further added that the courts should provide limited interim protection while considering the liberty of citizens.

However, the top court imposed certain conditions on grant of transit anticipatory bail. It ruled that the investigating officer and agency should be given notice on the first date of such protection. And the applicant must satisfy the court that they are not able to approach the otherwise jurisdictional court, which includes apprehension of violation of life and liberty.

The court while pronouncing the judgement stressed the need to ascertain the territorial proximity when granting such anticipatory bail.

The bench also clarified that the accused cannot travel to another state just to file a bail plea and they must have a clear reason to do so.

The case came to the top court as different High Courts have previously taken divergent views in the matter of transit anticipatory bail.