Anticipatory bail parameters required proper consideration; non-application of settled factors led to quashing and remand for fresh decision.

Anticipatory bail requires a proper application of settled parameters, including the seriousness of the allegations, the need for custodial interrogation, and other relevant considerations at the bail stage. The Bombay High Court found that the impugned orders omitted material aspects relevant to the exercise of bail jurisdiction and were therefore contrary to settled law and unsustainable. The bail orders were quashed and set aside, and the anticipatory bail applications were remanded to the Additional Sessions Court for fresh decision. Interim protection was continued until fresh disposal.

---

---

Issues: Whether the anticipatory bail orders granted by the Additional Sessions Judge required interference for non-consideration of the settled parameters governing grant of bail and for consequent remand of the bail applications.

Analysis: The impugned orders were found to have omitted consideration of material aspects relevant to exercise of bail jurisdiction. The governing principles for grant of bail were noted as requiring a proper assessment of the seriousness of the allegations, the necessity of custodial interrogation, and the settled judicial parameters applicable at the stage of anticipatory bail. In view of those omissions, the orders were treated as contrary to the settled legal position and unsustainable. The parties also consented to quashing of the orders and remand of the bail applications, while seeking continuation of protection until fresh disposal.

Conclusion: The anticipatory bail orders were quashed and set aside and the bail applications were remanded to the Additional Sessions Court for fresh decision.

Final Conclusion: The challenge succeeded, and the matter was sent back for reconsideration of the anticipatory bail requests, with interim protection continuing until fresh disposal.

---