https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293013 The Court clarified that Section 438 Cr.P.C. allows parties to choose between approaching the High Court or the Sessions Court for anticipatory bail without a requirement to first go to the Sessions Court. The High Court can entertain applications directly in exceptional circumstances, not as a routine practice. Special circumstances, like rejected bail for a co-accused or immediate protection needs, may warrant direct High Court intervention. The Explanation to Section 438(2) does not restrict the High Court's jurisdiction, and anticipatory bail should last until the accused is summoned by the Court. In this case, the application for anticipatory bail was denied due to a lack of specific allegations or fear of arrest. en-us Fri, 06 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Jan 2021 21:41:12 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293013 The Court clarified that Section 438 Cr.P.C. allows parties to choose between approaching the High Court or the Sessions Court for anticipatory bail without a requirement to first go to the Sessions Court. The High Court can entertain applications directly in exceptional circumstances, not as a routine practice. Special circumstances, like rejected bail for a co-accused or immediate protection needs, may warrant direct High Court intervention. The Explanation to Section 438(2) does not restrict the High Court's jurisdiction, and anticipatory bail should last until the accused is summoned by the Court. In this case, the application for anticipatory bail was denied due to a lack of specific allegations or fear of arrest. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 06 Dec 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293013