A Division bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Prashant Kumar Mishra today agreed to examine the question of whether a court is empowered to grant anticipatory bail where the FIR is registered beyond its jurisdiction.

The Court also sought the assistance of the ASG Vikramjit Banerjee in this matter since the issue is related to Central Legislation and appointed him to assist the court on the issue.

It was argued by the Senior advocate K. Paul assisted by AOR Rishi Matoliya that there is no direct or indirect legal authority of the Apex Court on the issue and if this is permitted it would create a situation of havoc in the country.

In the present case, FIR was lodged in Rajasthan whereas the accused has obtained bail from City Court at Bengaluru. The Complainant of a matrimonial case had directly approached the Supreme Court against the order passed by the City Court alleging that the court granting bail didn't have jurisdiction to hear the same.

The bench of Justices KM Joseph and BV Nagarathna issued notices in the matter on 17.03.2023. 

During the court of arguments it was firstly observed by the Court that since it is an order passed by the Trial Court, the best course would have been to approach the High Court first which was answered by the Sr. Adocate that different high Courts have different views on the issue and the concerned Karnataka High Court has a contrary view on the issue.

Justice Nagarathna observed that the order passed by the City Court although records the crime number but it is silent on the issue of the name of the police station which is very strange. She also emphasized that the jurisdiction of the court is also related to the arresting authority. It was observed that the Trial Court which is having jurisdiction overhearing the anticipatory bail could only be related to the arresting authority.

Justice Mishra orally observed that this is very strange, if this has happened in this case, it could happen in serious cases of Terrorist activities and others.

The State of Karnataka was represented through advocate VN Raghupati who addressed the court that the public prosecutor had assisted the court. The Court was also surprised by this argument that the public prosecutor for the State of Karnataka who does not have the case file and diary has assisted the court.

The case is now fixed for a hearing on 21.08.2023 for final hearing.