2014 (1) TMI 1931

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....4 at Crime Branch Ahmedabad, Gujarat. 2. This Court, by order dated 10th January, 2014, gave interim protection to the applicants till today. The offence is registered at State of Gujarat. This Court, therefore, has no territorial jurisdiction over the offences committed and registered in State of Gujarat. Therefore, on the point of maintainability of this application for anticipatory bail, objection is raised from the prosecution. 3. The learned counsel has submitted that in view of section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, there is no impediment for a person to seek relief under the said Section to any High Court, even if an offence is not registered in its jurisdiction. A citizen may approach any High Court for anticipatory ba....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nt, by the learned Special Public Prosecutor from the Gujarat and the learned APP. The Hon'ble Single Judge of Rajasthan High Court in the case of Jodha Ram (supra), has taken a view that at the stage of anticipatory bail, there is no trial, but it is obvious to safeguard the liberty of an individual basically pre-trial, is in consonance with the concept of human dignity enshrined under the Constitution of the country. So any Court at places where offender apprehends arrest including Sessions Court has territorial competence to pass orders and grant anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code. However, Single Judge of Kerala High Court in C.T. Mathew's case (supra)and the Single Judge of Gujarat High Court in the case of Neela J....