The Allahabad High Court recently ruled that an accused individual is not barred from seeking anticipatory bail even if their petition to quash the FIR has been dismissed. This decision underscores that the legal avenues for seeking anticipatory bail and quashing an FIR are distinct and independent.

The Court emphasized that the rejection of a quashing petition does not preclude the accused from approaching the Sessions Court or High Court under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) for anticipatory bail. This ruling clarifies that the legal processes for quashing an FIR and seeking anticipatory bail serve different purposes and are not mutually exclusive.

This judgment aligns with the Court’s previous observations, where it noted that the rejection of anticipatory bail is not a ground for dismissing a petition under Article 226 of the Constitution for quashing an FIR. The Court had stated that the scope of Article 226 is broader and allows for the quashing of FIRs even if anticipatory bail has been denied.

Therefore, individuals facing charges can pursue both remedies concurrently, depending on the circumstances and legal strategies involved.

Sources