Early Times Report
Jammu, Jan 30: In a significant order tightening procedural compliance in anticipatory bail matters, the Fast Track Court, Jammu has dismissed an anticipatory bail application after holding that no “back door approach” is permissible and that the petition and supporting affidavit must be signed by the petitioner himself when he is not under any restraint.
The order was passed by Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Jammu, Amarjeet Singh Langeh, in bail application on January 30, 2026, arising out of FIR No. 08/2026 registered at Police Station Gandhi Nagar, Jammu, in a case alleging commission of rape.
The petition was moved on behalf of accused Manjinder Singh (42) but was filed and signed by his wife, who also signed the affidavit in support of the plea. The victim, through counsel, raised a preliminary objection on maintainability, arguing that when the accused is at large and not under any curbs, he must sign the application and affidavit personally, and that there was no authorization shown empowering the wife to file the petition. The prosecution also supported the objection.
After hearing the parties, the court observed that the petitioner had not appeared even once since filing the plea and there was no explanation in the application as to what prevented him from signing it. The court held that the petitioner was expected to demonstrate bona fides and that he was not absconding by personally signing the anticipatory bail petition and affidavit, instead of “embarking upon back door approach.”
The defence cited two judgments—2014 SCC Online Del 4898 and 2001 (4) MPLJ 164—to argue that the petitioner need not sign. However, the court found the reliance misplaced, noting that the Delhi High Court decision related to cancellation of bail, while the Madhya Pradesh judgment did not lay down that an anticipatory bail plea and affidavit are not required to be signed by the petitioner.
Upholding the preliminary objection, the court ruled that since the application and supporting affidavit were not signed by the petitioner, and no authorization was produced authorising the wife to institute the proceedings, the anticipatory bail plea was not maintainable and was accordingly dismissed. (JNF) |
