High Court Of Rajasthan
Judgename : Shiv Kumar Sharma
Suresh - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 5183 of 1999
Decided On : 12/13/1999
BAIL - SECTION 438 CRPC - SECTION 71 CRPC - SECTION 70(2) CRPC - INDECENT REPRESENTATION OF WOMEN (PROHIBITION) ACT, 1986 - SCOPE OF SECTION 438(3) CRPC - INTERPRETATION OF SECTION 71 CRPC - POWERS OF JUDICIAL MAGISTRATE TO CONVERT WARRANT OF ARREST INTO BAILABLE WARRANT - APPLICABILITY OF SECTION 71 CRPC TO ACCUSED AND WITNESSES - SUMMARY OF ACTS AND SECTIONS REFERENCED AND DISCUSSED BY THE COURT.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner, accused of rape and threatening to make public the prosecutrix's nude photographs, filed a bail application under Section 438 CrPC. The court considered three questions: (1) Can a Judicial Magistrate convert a warrant of arrest into a bailable warrant in a case triable by a Sessions Court? (2) Do the provisions of Section 71 CrPC apply only to witnesses? (3) What is the scope of sub-section (3) of Section 438 CrPC?
Finding of the Court:
The court held that: (1) A Judicial Magistrate can convert a warrant of arrest into a bailable warrant under Section 71 CrPC, as the word 'person' in this section includes both accused and witnesses. (2) Section 71 CrPC should be read with sub-section (2) of Section 70 CrPC, giving the Magistrate wide powers to convert warrants of arrest into bailable warrants. (3) The provisions of sub-section (3) of Section 438 CrPC are not attracted unless directions under sub-section (1) of Section 438 CrPC have been issued in favor of the petitioner. However, the application for anticipatory bail was otherwise maintainable as non-bailable warrants were issued against the petitioner.
Issues: 1. Can a Judicial Magistrate convert a warrant of arrest into a bailable warrant in a case triable by a Sessions Court? 2. Do the provisions of Section 71 CrPC apply only to witnesses? 3. What is the scope of sub-section (3) of Section 438 CrPC?
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on the following precedents: 1. Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab: The High Court and Sessions Court have the discretion to grant anticipatory bail based on the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. Ghanshyam vs. State of Rajasthan: Section 438 CrPC applies to cases where a Magistrate has taken cognizance of a non-bailable offense and issued a warrant of arrest. 3. Nand Ram vs. State of Rajasthan: Similar view as in Ghanshyam vs. State of Rajasthan. 4. Santu Ram vs. State of Rajasthan: Magistrate has the power to reconsider orders regarding the issuance of non-bailable warrants under Section 70(2) CrPC. 5. Duli Chand & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan: Order of issuance of warrant of arrest can be converted into bailable warrants. 6. Surindra Singh vs. State of Rajasthan: Magistrate has jurisdiction to cancel the warrant of arrest issued under Section 70(2) CrPC.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the bail application, finding that the petitioner was not entitled to a direction under sub-section (3) of Section 438 CrPC as no direction under sub-section (1) of Section 438 CrPC was issued in his favor. The court also vacated the interim orders passed earlier.
Shiv Kumar Sharma, J.- The accused petitioner Suresh has moved this bail application under Section 438 CrPC in a case under Section 376 IPC read with Section 6 of Indecent Representation of Women (Prohibition) Act, 1986. The allegations against the petitioner are that he committed rape with the prosecutrix and threatened her to make public her nude photographs. During the course of arguments following three questions emerged.
1) Whether a Judicial Magistrate in exercise of powers under Section 71 CrPC can convert warrant of
arrest into bailable warrant in a case triable by me Sessions Court?
2) Whether the provisions contained in Section 71 CrPC are applicable only to the witnesses?
3) What is the scope of sub-section (3) of Section 438 CrPC ?
(2). Learned advocate of the Bar who were invited to assist the court made their respective submissions. (3). In Gurubaksh Singh Sibbia vs. State of Punjab AIR 1980 SC 1632, their Lordships of the Supreme Court indicated that the High Court and the court of Sessions to whom the application for anticipatory bail is made ought to be left free in the exercise of their judicial discretion to grant bail if they consider it fit to do so on the particular facts and circumstances of the case and on such conditions as the case may warrant. (4). The Division Bench of this Court in Ghanshyam vs. State of Rajasthan 1977 RCC 19 observed that the provisions contained in Section 438 CrPC are applicable to a case where cognizance of a nonbailable offence has been taken by a Magistrate against any person and a warrant of arrest has been issued to compel his attendance. (5). Similar view was taken in Nand Ram vs. State of Rajasthan 1979 RLW 477 by the Division Bench of this Court. (6). Mr. S.K. Gupta, learned counsel invited my attention towards the provisions contained in Section 438 CrPC and canvassed that the view taken by the Division Bench of this Court in Ghanshyam vs. State of Rajasthan (supra) is not correct and matter may be referred to Larger Bench. I am unable to parsuade myself to agree with the submissions of Mr. Gupta. In order to attract the provisions contained in sub-section (3) of Section 438 CrPC issuance of directions under sub-section (I) of Section 438 is necessary. Sub-Section (3) of Section 438 CrPC provides that after issuance of directions under sub-section (1) of Section 438 CrPC if a person is arrested without warrant by police officer and if such person is prepared at the time of arrest or at any time while in the custody of such officer to give bail, he shall be released on and in case where the Magistrate took cognizance and issue warrant of arrest against such person in whose favour directions under sub-section (1) of Section 438 were issued the Magistrate shall issue bailable warrant in conformity with the direction of the court under sub-section (1) of Section 438 Cr.P.C. whereas in Ghanshyam vs. State (supra) situation was quite different. It was held that anticipatory bail could be granted even though the Magistrate had taken cognizance of non-bailable offence and issued warrant of arrest. (7). In so far as interpretation of Section 71 CrPC is concerned, I am of the view that a Judicial Magistrate under this section can convert warrant of arrest into bailable warrant. The word ‘person’ used in this section can be attracted to the accused as well as the witnesses. This court had occasion to interpret Section 70(2) of Cr.P.C. in Santu Ram vs. State of Rajasthan 1991 RCC 454 and it was indicated that in sub-section (2) of Section 70 Cr.P.C. the Magistrate had all the powers to reconsider the orders with regard to issue of non-bailable warrants. (8). In Duli Chand & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan 1993 Cr.L.J. 827, it was held that order of issuance of warrant of arrest can he convened into bailable warrants. (9). In Surindra Singh vs. State of Rajasthan 1981 Cr.L.R. (Raj.) 226, it was observed that the Magistrate has jurisdiction to cancel the warrant of arrest issued by
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.