TaxTMI Login
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Just a moment...
AI OCR ✕Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the power to grant anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is to be confined by reading into it the restrictions applicable to regular bail, whether blanket orders of anticipatory bail are permissible, and what principles govern the exercise of discretion under that provision.
Analysis: Section 438 confers a wide and discretionary power on the High Court and the Court of Session to direct release on bail in anticipation of arrest. The provision is designed to protect personal liberty and operates on the footing that the applicant is still unarrested and entitled to the presumption of innocence. The language of the section does not justify importing the restrictive conditions and limitations of Sections 437 and 439 as rigid fetters on the power under Section 438. The discretion must be exercised judicially on the facts of each case, having regard to relevant considerations such as the nature and seriousness of the accusation, the likelihood of absconding, the possibility of tampering with witnesses, and the larger interests of the public and the State. At the same time, anticipatory bail cannot be granted as a blanket protection against all future accusations; the applicant must disclose specific facts showing a reasonable belief of likely arrest for a non-bailable offence, and the order must be tied to the offence or offences in respect of which relief is sought. Conditions may be imposed to ensure cooperation with investigation and to safeguard the police's investigational powers.
Conclusion: The restrictions framed by the High Court and urged by the State were rejected, the scope of Section 438 was held to be broad and discretionary, and blanket anticipatory bail was held impermissible.
Final Conclusion: The decision affirms anticipatory bail as a liberty-protecting remedy to be granted or refused on case-specific judicial discretion, while preserving the police's right to investigate and requiring specificity in the relief sought.
Ratio Decidendi: Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 must be applied as a broad discretionary safeguard against unjustified arrest, without importing rigid limitations from ordinary bail provisions, but it cannot be used to grant blanket protection divorced from specific facts and offences.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
