IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY AT GOA CRIMINAL APPLICATION ( BAIL ) NO. 62 OF 2010 SHRI SANJAY KASHINATH PARAB, ... Applicant Versus STATE THROUGH THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR ... Respondent Mr. Arun Bras De Sa, Advocate for the Applicant. Coram:- N. A. BRITTO, J. Date:- 30th March, 2010 P.C.: Heard. 2. This is an application for anticipatory bail. It appears that the applicant is involved in Crime No.16/2010, involving offences punishable under certain sections of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, NDPS Act, 1985 as well as offences under the Indian Penal Code. 3. Section 438 of Criminal Procedure Code confers wide and extraordinary powers to grant anticipatory bail on the High Court or the Court of Sessions. Jurisdiction is concurrent. When it is so, the choice is of superior Court whether to entertain an application for anticipatory bail or not. Practice is to approach the inferior Court, first. 4. Learned Counsel has not been able to give any compelling or exceptional reason why this Court ought to entertain the present application for anticipatory bail, bypassing the Court of Sessions. Learned Counsel has placed reliance on a full Bench decision of Patna High Court reported in 1993 Cr.L.J. 2436 and some other decisions, contending that the Special Judge of NDPS Court has jurisdiction to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. If that be so, the applicant is at liberty to move the said Court, for anticipatory bail. I need not say any more, at present. 5. With the above observations, the application is disposed off. N. A. BRITTO, J. NH