The Supreme Court of India (SC) has reiterated that when an FIR has been refused to be quashed, and a High Court declines to quash it, the High Court should not at the same time grant pre-arrest bail. Instead, the accused should first apply for such bail in the court at the trial-level — typically a Sessions Court.
⚖️ Key Observations by the Court
The SC stressed that allowing an accused to bypass the Sessions Court and go straight to the High Court for pre-arrest bail undermines the hierarchical structure of criminal justice and may lead to a flood of bail applications before High Courts.
The Court said that the power to grant anticipatory or pre-arrest bail under law (previously under Section 438 CrPC, now under relevant BNSS provisions) is available to both Sessions Court and High Court — but that ordinarily, the Sessions Court should be the first forum approached.
Only in exceptional or extraordinary circumstances, with reasons recorded, should a High Court directly entertain bail applications without first requiring the Sessions Court to consider the matter.
📌 Significance & Practical Effect
The decision aims to enforce procedural discipline and discourage forum-shopping by persons seeking bail.
It ensures that lower (trial) courts, which have closer proximity to case records, investigation material, and prosecutorial machinery, function as first filters — preserving proper investigative and prosecutorial process before higher-court intervention.
By discouraging premature or blanket bail orders from High Courts, the Court seeks to reduce chances of misuse of bail provision, and protect the integrity of criminal proceedings.
