9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Setting aside/quashing of Look Out Circular issued against the petitioner. 2. Jurisdiction of High Court to grant anticipatory bail directly without approaching the Court of Sessions first. Analysis: 1. The petitioner filed a petition seeking to set aside/quash the Look Out Circular issued against him as he was wanted in a murder case in India. The petitioner, settled in Dubai, wanted to surrender before the competent court in Delhi but faced restrictions due to the Look Out Circular. However, the proceedings against the petitioner in Dubai were dropped, his passport was released, and he was no longer restricted from coming to India. The petitioner's counsel requested anticipatory bail directly from the High Court due to fear of arrest upon arrival in India. 2. The High Court highlighted that in cases involving non-bailable offenses, the usual remedy is to seek anticipatory bail before surrendering in court. Both the Sessions Court and the High Court have concurrent jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail. However, it is a well-established rule that the superior forum should be approached only after the inferior forum, i.e., the Sessions Court, has been approached. This practice prevents flooding the High Court with bail applications that can be conveniently handled by the Sessions Court. The High Court may entertain direct applications for anticipatory bail only in exceptional cases where circumstances warrant such intervention. 3. The High Court emphasized the need for caution in identifying exceptional cases justifying direct intervention without approaching the Sessions Court first. Directly approaching the High Court for anticipatory bail may lead to premature opinions on the case's merits, potentially prejudicing the trial in lower courts. The Court cited precedents from other High Courts supporting the practice of approaching the Sessions Court first before seeking relief from the High Court. In the present case, the petitioner failed to establish exceptional circumstances justifying bypassing the Sessions Court. 4. The High Court dismissed the petition as infructuous since the petitioner's issues in Dubai were resolved, and his passport was released. The petitioner was advised to seek anticipatory bail from the Trial Court, with the option to approach the High Court if necessary. The Court clarified that the petitioner's original petition was solely for quashing the Look Out Circular and not for anticipatory bail. The petitioner's request for interim protection was denied, as more than three months had passed since the request was made. The judgment concluded by disposing of the petition and granting the petitioner the liberty to seek anticipatory bail from the Trial Court.
|
