Concurrent bail jurisdiction preserves the right to approach either forum directly without first moving the Sessions Court.

Sections 438 and 439 confer concurrent jurisdiction on the High Court and the Court of Sessions for anticipatory and regular bail. A person apprehending arrest or seeking bail may choose either forum, and the statute contains no requirement to approach the Sessions Court first. Because the issue concerns personal liberty, the choice of forum must be construed liberally, and courts cannot read in a prior-approach rule or an exceptional-circumstances threshold by judicial restraint. A bail petition filed directly before the High Court is therefore maintainable and may be decided on its own merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether a person seeking anticipatory bail or regular bail must first approach the Court of Sessions before moving the High Court, and whether the High Court can insist on showing exceptional circumstances before entertaining such a petition.

Analysis: The statutory language of Section 438 and Section 439 confers concurrent jurisdiction on the High Court and the Court of Sessions. A person apprehending arrest or seeking bail is given the choice to approach either forum, and the provision contains no restriction requiring prior resort to the Sessions Court. In matters touching personal liberty, the statutory right to choose the forum must receive a liberal construction, and no self-imposed procedural embargo can be read into the text. The fact that hierarchy and convenience may favour approaching the Sessions Court first does not justify curtailing the express statutory choice. A petition directly filed before the High Court is therefore maintainable, and the Court may decide it on its own merits without insisting on exceptional circumstances as a precondition for entertainment.

Conclusion: The restriction requiring prior approach to the Sessions Court was rejected, and the citizen was held entitled to choose either forum under Sections 438 and 439.

Final Conclusion: The reference was answered by affirming concurrent access to the High Court and the Court of Sessions in bail matters, leaving the individual liberty-based choice of forum intact.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the statute expressly permits an applicant to apply to either the High Court or the Court of Sessions, courts cannot add a prior-approach requirement or exceptional-circumstances threshold by judicial self-restraint.

---