Anticipatory bail notice requirement clarified: prior notice to the State was held unnecessary, and interim protection was granted.

Prior notice to the Government Advocate or public prosecutor before presenting an anticipatory bail application before the High Court was held not to be mandatory under the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 read with Section 438(3) CrPC. The court distinguished notice requirements for bail proceedings from notice after an interim order in anticipatory bail matters, and emphasised that such applications should be heard urgently so that prompt instructions from the State do not frustrate speedy justice. Interim anticipatory bail was granted in favour of the applicant pending further hearing.

---

---

Issues: Whether prior notice to the Government Advocate or public prosecutor is required before filing and entertaining an anticipatory bail application before the High Court, and whether interim anticipatory bail should be granted pending further hearing.

Analysis: Chapter XVIII, Rule 18 of the Allahabad High Court Rules, 1952 governs notice for bail applications, while Section 438(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with notice after grant of an interim order in anticipatory bail matters. Reading both together, the requirement of prior notice before presentation of an anticipatory bail application was held not to be mandatory. The order further notes that anticipatory bail matters should be heard urgently and that the State should obtain instructions promptly so that unnecessary delay does not defeat speedy justice.

Conclusion: Prior notice before filing an anticipatory bail application was held not to be required, and interim anticipatory bail was granted in favour of the applicant.

---