SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2006 Supreme(Mad) 724

K.N.BASHA
Regupathi – Appellant
Versus
Govindan andAnother – Respondent


Advocates:
A. Balagury, for Petitioner.
V. Madhavan, Government Advocate, for Respondent.

JUDGMENT

Per K.N. BASHA, J.

The petitioner has come forward with this petition praying to grant anticipatory bail for him on the ground that he is facing trial in C.C.No. 324 of 2004 on the file of the Court of Judicial Magistrate, Kallakuruchi, for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act wherein a Non Bailable Warrant is issued against him.

2. Heard both sides.

3. A. Balaguru, the learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner was not able to appear before the trial Court on 15.7. 2005, though he was regularly appearing for all the dates of hearing, as a result of which, the learned Magistrate has issued a Non Bailable Warrant against the petitioner.

4. The offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is a bailable one, since the same is punishable with imprisonment for a maximum period of two years. But, unfortunately, the learned Magistrates has issued non-bailable warrant without a preceding bailable warrant where the offence is bailable, is not in accordance with the scheme of the Cr. P.C. and hence illegal. Therefore, while exercising the power conferred under Section 87 Cr.P.C. and issuing a warrant, in a case of bailable o



















Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top