Justice Sanjay Dhar Holds Residence Outside J&K No Exceptional Ground to Bypass Sessions Court; Absconding and Non-Cooperation With Investigation Weigh Against Relief
JAMMU, October 22: The High Court of Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed an anticipatory bail application filed by a proclaimed offender in a case involving allegations of rape of a minor girl, observing that merely claiming to reside outside the Union Territory does not constitute sufficient justification for approaching the High Court directly without first seeking relief from the Sessions Court.
Justice Sanjay Dhar, while declining to entertain the plea, emphasised that an applicant seeking pre-arrest protection directly from the High Court must demonstrate exceptional or compelling circumstances warranting departure from the ordinary course of approaching the competent Sessions Court.
The Court observed that the petitioner had failed to establish any special circumstance that could justify the direct invocation of its jurisdiction for anticipatory bail.
It further noted that the petitioner had not disclosed his present residential address in the application and had instead mentioned his address as Village Kohag, Tehsil Billawar, District Kathua.
“In such circumstances, when no material has been brought before this Court to show that the petitioner has any compelling reason to approach this Court directly, his bail application cannot be entertained by this Court directly,” the Court observed.
Proclaimed Offender Status Weighs Against Bail Relief
The High Court also took note of the petitioner’s status as an absconder and his failure to join the investigation for several years.
Justice Dhar observed that these circumstances constituted a significant factor against granting the discretionary relief of anticipatory bail, particularly when the petitioner had already been declared a proclaimed offender by the trial court.
The Court underscored that a person seeking protection against arrest cannot rely merely on a claim of residence outside the Union Territory to bypass the ordinary judicial process. The applicant must place sufficient material on record to establish why approaching the Sessions Court first would not be appropriate in the circumstances of the case.
Case Involves IPC Section 376, POCSO Act Provisions
The anticipatory bail application arose from a case registered at Police Station Billawar in Kathua district under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. During the investigation, offences under Sections 4 and 6 of the Protection of Children from Sexual Offences (POCSO) Act were also found to be established, according to the case details.
The petitioner had sought pre-arrest protection despite having been declared a proclaimed offender by the trial court.
After examining the circumstances placed before it, the High Court found no compelling ground to entertain the application directly. The petitioner’s prolonged absence from the investigation and his proclaimed offender status further weighed against the grant of relief.
Petition Dismissed
Holding that the petitioner had failed to demonstrate exceptional circumstances justifying direct recourse to the High Court, Justice Sanjay Dhar dismissed the anticipatory bail application.
The decision reiterates the importance of following the ordinary judicial process for seeking pre-arrest bail and establishing adequate grounds when requesting the High Court to entertain such a plea directly.(KNC)
