2024 (5) TMI 1322 - HC - Indian Laws

Challenged the order passed u/s 482 of CrPC - Cancellation of the Non Bailable Warrants NBW s - denial of bail - HELD THAT - In peculiar facts of this case, while filing the application u/s 70(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the specific stand was taken that the non appearance, was on account of the ailment of the petitioner-accused and once this fact has not been denied or controverted by the non-applicant/complainant, therefore, on this ground also, the Impugned Order dated 23.04.2024, by recording the findings that the Learned Trial Court was not satisfied with the grounds so taken, is vitiated by non-application of mind; when, the plea was not denied/or is admitted by the non-applicant - complainant also. Thus, the impugned order dated 23.04.2024, passed by the Learned Trial Court i.e. Learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, is quashed and set aside. Since the petitioner-accused is in judicial custody , therefore, the Respondents/State Authorities are directed to release the petitioner-accused Dipender Thakur from custody, on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Learned Trial Court. Thus, the instant petition as well as the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any, shall also stand disposed of , accordingly.

Summary

Issues involved:
Assailing order u/s 482 of CrPC, cancellation of NBW, denial of bail, judicial custody.

Assailing the Order:
The petitioner approached the High Court u/s 482 of CrPC challenging the order dated 23.04.2024 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bilaspur, dismissing the application for cancellation of Non Bailable Warrants (NBW) and denying bail, resulting in the petitioner being sent to judicial custody.

Cancellation of NBW:
The petitioner, accused in a case under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, surrendered before the Trial Court after NBWs were issued due to non-appearance. The Trial Court, despite the petitioner's surrender, refused to cancel the NBWs, which was deemed as an error by the High Court as the purpose of NBWs is to ensure the accused's presence.

Denial of Bail:
The High Court found fault with the Trial Court's refusal to grant bail to the petitioner, especially since the offence was bailable and the petitioner had surrendered. The Trial Court's decision was considered against the spirit of bail, which aims to secure the accused's presence during proceedings.

Judicial Custody:
The High Court set aside the Trial Court's order, quashing it and directing the release of the petitioner from judicial custody upon furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with one surety. The Court emphasized that the Trial Court's decision was flawed and lacked proper consideration of the petitioner's reasons for non-appearance.

Conclusion:
The High Court's decision highlighted the importance of adhering to legal procedures and ensuring that the rights of the accused are upheld, especially in cases involving bail and custody matters.