2020 (6) TMI 743 - HC - Indian Laws

Territorial Jurisdiction - Seeking grant of transit bail - protection of individual with an anticipatory bail of limited duration so as to enable him to approach the appropriate court vested with territorial jurisdiction to pass a regular order under section 438 or 439 Cr.P.C. - HELD THAT - The Covid pandemic has taught us that much can be done effectively without physical movement and personal interaction. The advances in Information and Communication Technology has ensured that contacting a lawyer in another States is no longer a harrowing experience. Bar Associations in most States and even the districts, have directories listing the names of lawyers and websites of lawyers, also disclose their proficiencies. This too, only in a situation where it is not possible to get the reference of a lawyer through word of mouth. This Court is of the firm opinion, that the practice of entertaining applications for Transit Bail is pass . It was a procedure having no statutory sanction, yet justifiable in a bygone era when poor logistics, transportation and dismal communication saw persons being arrested by the police of another State even before such a person could move the Sessions Court or the High Court having territorial jurisdiction to entertain his application for anticipatory bail. It is no longer so. The practice of Transit Bail by which the High Court or the Sessions Court could pass an order of anticipatory bail for a limited duration to enable the person to approach the appropriate court to seek an proper order of anticipatory bail or bail, has ceased to have any utility in the present day India. The Applicant herein can effectively pursue his remedy by moving an application before the appropriate Court in the State of Rajasthan from the comfort of his home in Jabalpur requiring nothing more than a rectangular device called a Smart Phone - application is not maintainable before this Court and is dismissed.

Summary

Issues: Application for transit bail; Relevance of transit bail in current times.

Analysis:
1. Application for Transit Bail: The judgment addresses an application filed for the grant of transit bail by an individual who is the Director of Finance at a hotel in Jaipur and currently residing in Jabalpur. The concept of transit bail, not provided for in the Criminal Procedure Code, is explained as an anticipatory bail for a limited duration. It allows an individual residing within one High Court's territorial jurisdiction to seek relief to avoid arrest by police in another State where an FIR is registered. The purpose is to provide temporary protection until the individual can approach the appropriate court for anticipatory bail or regular bail.

2. Relevance of Transit Bail: The judgment delves into the historical evolution of transit bail as an equitable procedure to prevent individuals from facing arrest due to delays in approaching the court with territorial jurisdiction for anticipatory bail or bail. However, the judgment questions the continued relevance of transit bail in modern times, especially in light of technological advancements and improved communication methods. The court notes that the challenges faced in the past, such as contacting lawyers, sending documents, arranging fees, and giving instructions, can now be efficiently addressed through technology like smartphones, email, internet banking, and video conferencing.

3. Conclusion: The court concludes that the practice of transit bail, though not statutorily sanctioned, was justifiable in the past when logistical and communication challenges were prevalent. However, with the current technological capabilities and ease of remote communication, the court deems the practice of transit bail as outdated and unnecessary. The judgment dismisses the application for transit bail, stating that the applicant can effectively seek legal remedies by approaching the appropriate court in the State of Rajasthan from his residence in Jabalpur using modern communication devices like smartphones.