Back
P.DEVADASS
M. Selvam – Appellant
Versus
Superintendent of Police, Madurai District, Madurai – Respondent
What is the procedure to recall a non-bailable warrant in a cheque bouncing case under Section 138 NI Act? What are the considerations for granting bail on merits before issuing a non-bailable warrant inCheque bouncing cases? What are the limits on issuing non-bailable warrants when the offence is bailable under Section 138 NI Act?
Key Points: - The court directed recall of the non-bailable warrant and enforcement of attendance strictly following CrPC procedures (!) . - Emphasized strict adherence to procedures and considering bail on merits before issuing non-bailable warrants (!) (!) . - Acknowledged that while the offence under Section 138 NI Act is non-cognizable but bailable, non-bailable warrants should not be issued indiscriminately and must follow proper procedure to enforce attendance (!) (!) . - Highlighted that a warrant should not become a blank cheque in police hands and must be properly issued and executed (!) . - Observed that arrest warrants (non-bailable) are subject to due process under CrPC and Article 21 protections; recall was ordered due to lack of adherence to procedures (!) . - The petition was disposed of with directions to recall the N.B.W. and enforce attendance of the accused (!) . - The complainant’s role and police action in delaying execution of the N.B.W. were considered in the judgment (!) . - The matter involves a cheque bouncing case under Section 138 NI Act, where the offence is bailable and the procedure must be followed before resorting to non-bailable warrants (!) (!) . - The judgment clarifies that non-bailable warrants should be used only after exhausting bailable procedures if attendance cannot be enforced otherwise (!) . - Advocates and parties’ representations were considered but do not override procedural requirements established by CrPC (!) (!) .
The petitioner, who is the complainant in a cheque bouncing case in S.T.C.No.235 of 2012, came forward with this petition for a direction to the second respondent, the Inspector of Police, Karuppayurani Police Station, Madurai to execute the N.B.W. issued against the accused.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the third respondent received huge money and issued an useless cheque, in other words, without keeping sufficient amount in his bank account. Ultimately, it was dishonoured. Thus, the cheque bouncing case has been filed. In order to enforce the attendance of the accused, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Vadipatti issued non-bailable warrant, however, the police has not executed it.
3. On the other hand, the learned Government Advocate (Criminal side) would submit that actually non-bailable warrant has been issued to the Inspector of Police, Vadipatti and it is pending for execution.
4. It is a cheque bouncing case for an offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The offence is non-cognizable, but bailable.
5. One of the characteristic feature of a bailable offence is bail is 'as a matter of right', jail is an exception
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
