RAMESHCHANDRA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are the two applications for anticipatory bail on totally diffenent sets of facts. However, because of a common question, they are heard together. The common question is whether the High Court should directly entertain the applications for anticipatory bail or whether the petitioners should be directed to approach the Sessions Court first.

(2.) The petitioner in Misc. Criminal Application No.1145/86, is a Sub-Accountant in the Central Bank of India and the allegations against him are that he has committed offences of forgery, cheating and misappropriation of funds amounting to Rs.1,14,000.87. These offences are alleged to have been committed while the petitioner was discharging his duties as Sub-Accountant and he has been suspended in connection with the same.

(3.) In Misc. Criminal Application No.1151 of 1986, the allegation against the petitioner is about theft of one jeep belonging to the complainant his uncle. In the complaint dt. 12-3-1986, no name is disclosed as suspect or accused. However, after about a month, another complaint is recorded on 25-4-1986 wherein his uncle Patel Kala Ranchhodbhai has accused the present petitioner for offences punishable under Ss.379, 506(2) IPC and has stated that this accused had left the village after the theft of the jeep and the complainant had asked the police to make secret investigation against the petitioner in respect of that jeep and this petitioner on learning the said fact, threatened the complainant. Apprehending arrest by the police in connection with the offence of theft, the petitioner has preferred this application for anticipatory bail. The first matter arises from Kutch District and the second matter arises from Mehsana District. There is no doubt that application for anticipatory bail can be made to the Sessions Court or to the High Court. S.438(1) of the Cr.P.C. reads as under : -