- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Decided
- 8 September 2008
- Bench
- Arijit Pasayat, Harjit Singh Bedi
- Result
- Petition disposed of.
Headnote
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973:
s. 438 - Grant of bail to person apprehending arrest - HELD: A petition u/s 438 in respect of bailable offences is misconceived even if it is accepted that alleged offences are bailable - High Court was not justified that custodial interrogation was necessary-However, if petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail, the same shall be considered uninfluenced by any observations made by High Court.
Headnote as published in the Digital Supreme Court Reports by the Supreme Court of India. Paragraph references point to the judgment below.
Judgment
Since the petitioner alleges that the offences charged are bailable offences, the High Court was not justified in holding that custodial interrogation was necessary. Section 438 Cr.P.C. in terms relates to non-bailable offences. Therefore, a petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in relation to bailable offences is mis-conceived, even if it is acceptad that alleged offences are bailable. However, if the petitioner surrenders and seeks regular bail, the same shall be considered uninfluenced by any observations made by the High Court. The special leave petition is disposed of accordingly.
Case details
Arising from
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 6346 of 2008
From the final Judgment and Order dated 13.08.2008 of the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in Criminal Misc. No. M-20367 of 2008
Ranjit Kumar, Subodh Kumar Pathak, Shashi Ranjan, 8.
Appearances
Pattanaik and Dharmendra Kumar Sinha for the Appellant.
The following Order of the was delivered Heard learned senior counsel for the petitioner.
Source: Supreme Court of India, Digital Supreme Court Reports, via the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open dataset (CC BY 4.0). Text was extracted from the official PDF and may contain conversion errors. Check the official PDF before relying on it.