Despite FIR in different states, High Court and Sessions Court can grant bail

New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Monday ruled that high courts and sessions courts can grant transit anticipatory bail to an accused even if the FIR is registered in another state.

A bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjwal Bhuyan was hearing a case relating to a dowry demand complaint filed by a woman in Rajasthan whose husband was granted anticipatory bail by the Bengaluru district court.

The top court ruled that the HC or sessions courts can grant transit anticipatory bail to an accused even if the offense has not been committed within its jurisdiction and the interim protection will continue until the accused approaches the court having jurisdiction.

The top court further said that courts should provide limited interim protection while considering the liberty of citizens.

However, the apex court imposed certain conditions on the grant of transit anticipatory bail. It ruled that notice should be given to the investigating officer and the agency on the first date of such protection. And the applicant must satisfy the court that they are not otherwise able to approach a court having jurisdiction, including fear of violation of life and liberty.

While delivering the judgement, the court stressed the need to ascertain territorial proximity while granting such anticipatory bail.

The bench also made it clear that the accused cannot travel to another state just to file a bail plea and they must have a clear reason for doing so.

The matter came to the apex court as various high courts had earlier taken different views in the matter of transit anticipatory bail.