ANIL KUMAR Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned counsel for the parties.

(2.) A learned Single Judge of Patna High Court, while hearing three separate anticipatory bail applications, in all of which summons were issued to the petitioners in complaint cases, found that three questions needed to be referred to a Full Bench for final determination viz. (1) whether anticipatory bail petition is maintainable at the instance of an accused in a Complaint Case, wherein after inquiry, the court simply issues summons; (2) whether an application under Sec. 438 of Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19124 of 2014 dt.12/7/2023 the Code of Criminal Procedure can be entertained by a Special Court exercising the powers of Sessions Court and; (3) whether a person whose application for anticipatory bail has been rejected by the Court of Sessions has the liberty to move the High Court for the same relief?

(3.) For framing the aforenoted questions, the learned Single Judge referred to the Constitution Bench judgment of the Supreme Court in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia and Others vs. State of Punjab 1980 (2) SCC 565, which had declared that the applicant must show that he has reasons to believe that he may be arrested for a non-bailable offence. Such "reasons to believe" must be founded on reasonable grounds. Mere fear is not belief. It is not enough for the applicant to show that he has some sort of a vague apprehension that someone is going to make an accusation against him in pursuance of which he may be arrested. The belief of the applicant must be capable of being examined by the Court objectively because it is then alone that the Court can determine whether the apprehension of the applicant is genuine. Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.19124 of 2014 dt.12/7/2023