Concurrent anticipatory bail jurisdiction allows a direct application before the High Court without first approaching the Sessions Court.

Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure permits concurrent jurisdiction between the High Court and the Sessions Court for anticipatory bail. The analysis accepts that an applicant may move the High Court directly without first approaching the Sessions Court, because insisting on an initial approach to the Sessions Court would unduly narrow the statutory right to seek anticipatory bail. The view that the Sessions Court is often a more accessible first forum was treated as a matter of convenience, not a limitation on jurisdiction. A direct application before the High Court is therefore maintainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether an application for anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is maintainable when filed directly before the High Court without first approaching the Sessions Court.

Analysis: The competing views were considered on the scope of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The reasoning accepted the view that the High Court and the Sessions Court exercise concurrent jurisdiction under the provision. It was further noted that requiring a litigant to first move the Sessions Court and then approach the High Court would unnecessarily restrict the right to seek anticipatory bail directly before the High Court. The contrary view, which only suggests that the Sessions Court is ordinarily more accessible and therefore a preferable first forum, was not treated as negating concurrent jurisdiction.

Conclusion: The application filed directly before the High Court under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is maintainable.

---