2022 (7) TMI 1427 - HC - Indian Laws

Seeking grant of anticipatory bail - jurisdiction to grant protection to the applicants - scope of transit or anticipatory bail - HELD THAT - This court finds that there is no legislation or law which defines ''transit or anticipatory bail' in definitive or specific terms. The 41st Law Commission Report in 1969 recommended the provision of Anticipatory bail to safeguard the right to life and personal liberty of a person under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. In the Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, on such recommendation, provision of Anticipatory Bail was inserted in Section 438. The term ''transit' means the act of being moved from one place to another while the word ''anticipatory bail' means a temporary release of any accused person who is anticipating arrest, therefore, transit anticipatory bail refers to bail granted to any person who is apprehending arrest by police of a State other than the State he is presently located in. It is to be noted that transit bail is protection from arrest for a certain definite period as granted by the Court granting such transit bail. The mere fact that an accused has been granted transit bail, does not means that the regular court, under whose jurisdiction the case would fall, would extend such transit bail and would convert such transit bail into anticipatory bail. Upon the grant of transit bail, the accused person, who has been granted such transit bail, has to apply for anticipatory bail before the regular court. In the judgment of the Bombay High Court in the case of TEESTA ATUL SETALVAD AND ORS. VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA AND ORS. 2014 (1) TMI 1931 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT it was held that the High Court of one State can grant transit bail in respect of a case registered within the jurisdiction of another High Court in exercise of power under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It appears from the said judgment that there is no fetter on the part of the High Court in exercising the power under Section 438 of the Code in granting anticipatory bail for a limited period to enable the applicant to move the appropriate Court as the gravity of pretrial arrest and the loss of liberty of the individual cannot be compromised on the anvil of the powers, competence and/or jurisdiction of the Court. There is no fetter on the part of the High Court in granting a transit anticipatory bail to enable the applicants to approach the Courts including High Courts where the offence is alleged to have been committed and the case is registered. There is no doubt that the right to liberty is enshrined in Part-1 of the Constitution of India and such rights cannot be impinged except by following procedure established by law. This court finds that the commercial transaction ensued between the applicants and the complainant and there are criminal cases lodged by the parties against each other. It is a fit case where the applicants should get the privilege of transit pre-arrest bail - Application allowed.

Summary

Issues:
Grant of Transit Anticipatory Bail

Analysis:
The judgment by the High Court dealt with an application for transit anticipatory bail filed by multiple applicants in a case involving allegations under various sections of the Indian Penal Code. The applicants sought relief due to fears of arrest in a different state from where they resided. The applicants, including directors and employees of companies, were involved in a commercial transaction related to land development. The opposing party had allegedly not fulfilled their obligations, leading to reciprocal FIRs being lodged against each other.

The court delved into the concept of anticipatory bail, distinguishing it from regular bail as a pre-arrest relief effective immediately upon arrest. The judgment highlighted the purpose of transit anticipatory bail, which allows the accused to reach a competent court before seeking regular anticipatory bail. The court emphasized that transit bail is temporary and does not automatically convert into anticipatory bail.

Referring to a Bombay High Court judgment, the Allahabad High Court established that it had the authority to grant transit anticipatory bail to enable applicants to approach courts where the alleged offenses were registered. The judgment underscored the importance of safeguarding individual liberty and ensuring due process. The court granted transit bail to the applicants for a limited period, allowing them to seek appropriate relief in the concerned court.

The judgment also cited a Supreme Court decision that declined to interfere with the Bombay High Court's order granting transit bail, extending the relief period. Subsequently, a recent Bombay High Court judgment reiterated the principles of granting transit anticipatory bail to facilitate approaching the appropriate court for relief. In light of these precedents, the Allahabad High Court granted transit bail to the applicants for a specified period, enabling them to seek relief in the court where the case was registered.

In conclusion, the High Court allowed the application for transit anticipatory bail, emphasizing the applicants' right to liberty and the need for procedural fairness. The court directed the release of the applicants on transit bail, with specific conditions, for a limited period to enable them to seek appropriate relief in the concerned court.