KULKARNI, J. ( 1 ) SHRI Thimmarayappa for the petitioner and Sri C. H. Hanumantharaya for the respondents submitted that the matter itself may be heard finally on merits. Accordingly, arguments on the final merits of the petition are heard and it is disposed of finally. ( 2 ) THE present respondents are being proceeded for the offence under section 302. The present respondents have filed an application under Section 438 for anticipatory bail. The Sessions judge passed an order dated 30 10-1987 reading as :"spl. P. P. filed the accident extract. Until further orders, the respondent shall not arrest the petitioners The petitioners shall assist the police in investigation. Further arguments and orders by 16-11-1987. "therefore, the short question that arises for consideration is whether the sessions Judge or the High Court have got the power to direct the police not to arrest the accused-persons ? ( 3 ) SECTION 438 Cr. P. C. reads as :"s. 438 (1) When any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session for a direction under this section ; and that Court may, if it thinks fit, direct that in the event of such arrest, he shall be released on bail. (2) When the High Court or the court of Session makes a direction under sub-section (1), it may include such conditions in such directions in the light of the facts of the particular case, as it may think fit, including- (i) a condition that the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and when required ; (ii) a condition that the person shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer; (iii) a condition that the person shall not leave India without the previous permission of the Court; (iv) such other condition as may be imposed under sub-section (3) of section 437, as if the bail were granted under that section. (3) If such person is thereafter arrested without warrant by an off;cer in change of a police station on such accusation, and is prepared either at the time of arrest or at any time while in the custody of such officer to give bail, he shall be released on bail; and if a Magistrate taking cognizance of such offence decides that a warrant should issue in the first instance against that person, he shall issue a bailable warrant in conformity with the direction of the Court under sub-section (1 ). " ( 4 ) THEREFORE, section 438 in its entirety does not give any jurisdiction to the Sessions Judge to direct the police not to arrest at all. To issue any such direction would be nothing but hampering the investigation itself. It has been laid down in Durga Prasad v. State of Bihar (1987 Criminal Law Journal, Page 1200), as:"the High Court or the Court of Session cannot stay arrest of an accused person, because no such power flows either from S. 438 or from any other provision of the Code including S. 482. Of course in appropriate cases interim anticipatory bail for a limited period can be granted with the conditions mentioned in sub-sec. (2) of S. 438 of the Code, so that the investigation is not stifled in any manner. Even in the case where interim order of anticipatory bail is granted the Court has to consider at the final hearing thereof whether such interim order of anticipatory bail should be confirmed or recalled on perusal of the materials collected during the investigation. It need not be pointed out that an interim order passed without perusal of the case diary or on the basis of mis-statement of fact made has no sanctity and Courts should not be hesitant in recalling the same and directing the accused to surrender and make prayer for regular bail. The Police and Courts have been enjoined by the provisions of the Code a duty that a person who has committed a crime is brought to book and reaps the consequence of his action but, at the same time, an innocent person does not become victim of manipulation and machination of his adversary. But, while achieving this object, the Police, as well as Courts should know their limitations and should not directly or indirectly interfere with the functioning of each other. But, while achieving this object, the Police, as well as Courts should know their limitations and should not directly or indirectly interfere with the functioning of each other. " ( 5 ) THE Patna High Court in the said case has clearly laid down that there is no jurisdiction either in the Sessions judge or the High Court to direct the police not to arrest. At the most if the court wants to show indulgence to the accused persons it can release them on interim bail until the application under section 438 is disposed of. But releasing the accused on interim bail is a very exceptional remedy. The release of the accused on interim bail is only an exceptional measure which could be passed by the Sessions Judge and that too after recording reasons. Sri Hanumantharaya produced before me a certified copy of the order in Criminal Petition No. 781/87 passed by this Court. it was a case where the accused were released on interim anticipatory bail. In the said case, this Court has not laid down the condition on which the accused persons can be released on interim bail. The patna High Court has made it absolutely clear that the Sessions Judge has no power to direct the police not to arrest the accused. But if he feels satisfied from the records that the accusations are imaginary and unfounded then in such cases he can proceed to release the accused persons on interim anticipatory bail. ( 6 ) THEREFORE, under these circumstances, the present impugned order passed by the Sessions Judge directing the police not to arrest, is one passed without jurisdiction. Therefore, it is set aside. The revision is allowed. --- *** --- .