Anticipatory bail for proclaimed offenders is ordinarily unavailable absent rare exceptional circumstances, particularly where serious offences are alleged.

Anticipatory bail requires a judicious assessment of the gravity of accusation, risk of absconding and other relevant circumstances. A subsisting proclaimed offender who has not successfully challenged that status is ordinarily not entitled to pre-arrest protection. Departure is limited to rare and exceptional circumstances. The notes state that reliance on protections against automatic arrest for less serious offences was misplaced where the allegations included an offence punishable with life imprisonment or up to ten years. The grant of anticipatory bail was therefore described as improper and set aside.

---

---

Issues: Whether anticipatory bail could validly be granted to an accused who was a subsisting proclaimed offender.

Analysis: Grant of anticipatory bail requires a judicious exercise of discretion having regard to the gravity of accusation, likelihood of absconding and other relevant circumstances. The respondent had been declared a proclaimed offender and had not successfully challenged that declaration before seeking pre-arrest bail. The High Court incorrectly relied on the principle against automatic arrest for offences punishable up to seven years despite the inclusion of an offence carrying imprisonment for life or up to ten years. A proclaimed offender is ordinarily not entitled to pre-arrest protection; departure from that position is confined to rare and exceptional circumstances, which were absent.

Conclusion: The grant of anticipatory bail to the respondent was improper and was set aside.

---