(1)PaperforWorkshop

PAPERFORTHEWORKSHOPOF21/12/2014

SUBJECTRecenttrendsofarrest,remand,bailand

forfeitureofbailbonds.

GroupA

ARREST:

Theword'arrest'isderivedfromtheFrenchword'Arrester'

meaning'tostoporstay'andsignifiesarestraintoftheperson.

DefinitionbySupremeCourt:

Inthecaseof DirectorateofEnforcement..Vs..Deepak

Mahajan(AIR 1994 SC 1775; 1994 CR LJ 2269), the Hon'ble

SupremeCourthaselaboratelydealtwitharrestasunder:

46.Theword'arrest'isderivedfromtheFrenchword'Arreter'
meaning 'to stop or stay' and signifies a restraint of the person.
.....Theword'arrest'whenusedinitsordinaryandnaturalsense,
means the apprehension or restraint or the deprivation of one's
personalliberty.Thequestionwhetherthepersonisunderarrestor
not,dependsnotonthelegalityofthearrest,butonwhetherhehas
beendeprivedofhispersonallibertytogowherehepleases.When
used in the legal sense in connection with criminal offences, an
'arrest'consistsinthetakingintocustodyofanotherpersonunder
authorityempoweredbylaw,forthepurposeofholdingordetaining
himtoansweracriminalchargeorofpreventingthecommissionofa
criminaloffence.Theessentialelementstoconstituteanarrestinthe
above sense are that there must be an intent to arrest under the
authority,accompaniedbyaseizureordetentionofthepersoninthe
mannerknowntolaw,whichissounderstoodbythepersonarrested.
 (2)PaperforWorkshop

48.ThustheCodegivespowerofarrestnotonlytoapolice
officer and a Magistrate but also under certain circumstances or
givensituationstoprivatepersons.Further,whenanaccusedperson
appearsbeforeaMagistrateorsurrendersvoluntarily,theMagistrate
isempoweredtotakethataccusedpersonintocustodyanddealwith
him according to law. Needless to emphasize that the arrest of a
personisaconditionprecedentfortakinghimintojudicialcustody
thereof. To put it differently, thetakingofthepersonintojudicial
custody is followedafterthe arrestofthepersonconcernedbythe
Magistrateonappearanceorsurrender.Itwillbeappropriate,atthis
stage,tonotethatineveryarrest,thereiscustodybutnotviceversa
andthatbothofthewords'custody'and'arrest'arenotsynonymous
terms. Though 'custody' may amount to an arrest in certain
circumstances but not under all circumstances. (Sandeep
Bhatra..Vs..State of Rajasthan and another 2012 Cr LJ 1819
(RajasthanHighCourt).

RelevantprovisionsofCr.P.C.aboutarrest:

ChapterVoftheCodeofCriminalProcedure,1973deals
withthearrestofpersons.Section41to60ofChapterVdealswith
Arrest of Persons. Broadly speaking, arrest may be classified into
twocategoriesnamely,(I)Arrestunderwarrantsissuedbyacourt;
and(ii)Arrestswithoutwarrantsissuedbyacourt.
RelevantprovisionsofConstitutionaboutarrest:

Article22oftheConstitutiondealswithprotectionagainst
arrest&detentionincertaincases.Article22canbedividedintwo
parts.Onepartdealswithpersonsarrestedundertheordinarylawof
crimesandtheotherpartdealswithpersonsdetainedunderthelaw
ofpreventivedetention.

Inviewofincreasingincidenceofviolenceandtorturein
custody, the Supreme Court of India (in D.K.Basu ..Vs.. State of
 (3)PaperforWorkshop

WestBengalAIR1997SC610)laiddown11specificrequirements

andprocedurethatthepolice&otheragencieshavetofollowforthe
arrest,detention&interrogationofanyperson.Theseare:

(1)Thepolicepersonnelcarryingoutthearrestandhandling
theinterrogationofthearresteeshouldbearaccurate,visible
and clear identification and name togs with their
designations. The particulars of all such police personnel
whohandleinterrogationofthearresteemustberecordedin
aregister.

(2) That the police officer carrying out the arrest of the
arresteeshallprepareamemoofarrestatthetimeofarrest
andsuchmemoshallbeattestedbyatleastonewitness,who
maybeeitheramemberofthefamilyofthearresteeora
respectablepersonof thelocalityfromwherethearrestis
made. It shall also be counter signed by the arrestee and
shallcontainthetimeanddateofarrest.

(3)Apersonwhohasbeenarrestedordetainedandisbeing
heldincustodyinapolicestationorinterrogationcenteror
otherlockup,shallbeentitledtohaveonefriendorrelative
or other person known to him or having interest in his
welfarebeinginformed,assoonaspracticable,thathehas
beenarrestedandisbeingdetainedattheparticularplace,
unlesstheattestingwitnessofthememoofarrestishimself
suchafriendorarelativeofthearrestee.

(4) The time, place of arrest and venue of custody of an

arresteemustbenotifiedbythepolicewherethenextfriend
orrelativeofthearresteelivesoutsidethedistrictortown
throughthelegalAidOrganizationintheDistrictandthe
policestationoftheareaconcernedtelegraphicallywithina
periodof8to12hoursafterthearrest.

(5)Thepersonarrestedmustbemadeawareofthisrightto
havesomeoneinformedofhisarrestordetentionassoonhe
 (4)PaperforWorkshop

isputunderarrestorisdetained.

(6) An entry must be made in the diary at the place of

detentionregardingthearrestofthepersonwhichshallalso
disclosethenameofthenextfriendofthepersonwhohas
beeninformedofthearrestandthenamesandparticularsof
thepoliceofficialsinwhosecustodythearresteeis.

(7) The arrestee should, where he so requests, be also

examined at the time of his arrest and major and minor
injuries,ifanypresentonhis/herbody,mustberecordedat
thattime.The"InspectionMemo"mustbesignedbothbythe
arrestee and the police officer effecting the arrest and its
copyprovidedtothearrestee.

(8)Thearresteeshouldbesubjectedtomedicalexamination
by trained doctor every 48 hours during his detention in
custody by a doctor on the panel of approved doctors
appointed by Director, Health Services of the concerned
State or Union Territory. Director, Health Services should
preparesuchapanelforallTehsilsandDistrictsaswell.

(9)Copiesofallthedocumentsincludingthememoofarrest,
referredtoabove,shouldbesenttotheilakaMagistratefor
hisrecord.

(10) The arrestee may be permitted to meet his lawyer

during interrogation, though not throughout the
interrogation.

(11)Apolicecontrolroomshouldbeprovidedatalldistrict
and state headquarters, where information regarding the
arrest and the place of custody of the arrestee shall be
communicated by the officer causing the arrest, within 12
hoursofeffectingthearrestandatthepolicecontrolroomit
shouldbedisplayedonaconspicuousnoticeboard.

In the case of Siddharam Satlingappa

 (5)PaperforWorkshop

Mhetre..Vs..StateofMah.Andothers2011SAR(Cri)118(SC),

theHon'bleApexCourthasdealtwiththepointastowhenthere
shouldbearrest&procedurethereon&heldasunder:

123. The arrest should be the last option and it should be

restrictedtothoseexceptionalcaseswherearrestingtheaccusedis
imperativeinthefactsandcircumstancesofthatcase.

129. Incasethearrestisimperative,accordingtothefactsof
thecase,inthatevent,thearrestingofficermustclearlyrecordthe
reasons for the arrest of the accused before the arrest in the case
diary,butinexceptionalcaseswhereitbecomesimperativetoarrest
theaccusedimmediately,thereasonsberecordedinthecasediary
immediatelyafterthearrestismadewithoutlossofanytimesothat
thecourthasanopportunitytoproperlyconsiderthecaseforgrantor
refusalofbailinthelightofreasonsrecordedbythearrestingofficer.

IntherecentcaseofArneshKumarVs.StateofBihar
&anr.(CriminalAppealNo.1277/2014dt.02/07/2014,theHon'ble
Supreme Court has issued following directions in respect of all
offenceswhicharepunishablewithimprisonmentforatermwhich
maybelessthan7yearsorwhichmayextentto7years;whether
withorwithoutfine;

AlltheStateGovernmentstoinstructitspoliceofficersnot
toautomaticallyarrestwhenacaseunderSection498AoftheIPCis
registered but to satisfy themselves about the necessity for arrest
under the parameters laid down above flowing from Section 41,
Cr.PC;

Allpoliceofficersbeprovidedwithachecklistcontaining
specifiedsubclausesunderSection41(1)(b)(ii);

The police officer shall forward the check list duly filed
andfurnishthereasonsandmaterialswhichnecessitatedthearrest,
while forwarding/producing the accused before the Magistrate for
 (6)PaperforWorkshop

furtherdetention;

TheMagistratewhileauthorizingdetentionoftheaccused
shall peruse the report furnished by the police officer in terms
aforesaidandonlyafterrecordingitssatisfaction,theMagistratewill
authorizedetention;

Thedecisionnottoarrestanaccused,beforwardedtothe
Magistratewithintwoweeksfromthedateoftheinstitutionofthe
case with a copy to the Magistrate which maybeextended bythe
Superintendentofpoliceofthedistrictforthereasonstoberecorded
inwriting;

NoticeofappearanceintermsofSection41AofCr.PCbe
servedontheaccusedwithintwoweeksfromthedateofinstitutionof
thecase,whichmaybeextendedbytheSuperintendentofPoliceof
theDistrictforthereasonstoberecordedinwriting;

Failuretocomplywiththedirectionsaforesaidshallapart
fromrenderingthepoliceofficersconcernedliablefordepartmental
action,theyshallalsobeliabletobepunishedforcontemptofcourtto
beinstitutedbeforeHighCourthavingterritorialjurisdiction.

Authorizing detention without recording reasons as
aforesaid by the judicial Magistrate concerned shall be liable for
departmentalactionbytheappropriateHighCourt.

Thedirectionsaforesaidshallnotonlyapplytothecases
under Section 498A of the I.P.C. or Section 4 of the Dowry
ProhibitionAct,thecaseinhand,butalsosuchcaseswhereoffenceis
punishable with imprisonment for a term which may be less than
seven years or which may extend to seven years; whether with or
withoutfine.
 (7)PaperforWorkshop

REMAND:

Meaning,object&provisionsof'Remand':
Theword'remand'isnotdefinedintheCodeofCriminal

Procedure.TheobjectofremandprovisionsasenumeratedinSection

157 and 167 of the Code of CriminalProcedure,is to see that the

personarrestedbythePolicebeingbroughtbeforeaMagistratewith

least possible delay, in order to enable the later to judge, if such

person has to be further kept in custody and also to enable such

persontomakeanyrepresentation,ifhemaywishtomakeinthe

matter.Bytheseprovisions,itisalsointendedtopreventthepossible

abusebythepoliceoftheirpowerintryingtomakediscoveriesof

crimesbymeansofduress,terrorandwrongfulconfinement.

The scheme of the provisions contained in Sections 167,

209and309isasunder.Section167providesforthedetentionofan

accusedduringpendencyofinvestigation. Section209providesthe

detentionofanaccusedduringpendencyofCommitmentProceedings

and Section 309(2) provides for detention of an accused during

pendencyoftrialorinquiry.
 (8)PaperforWorkshop

GuidelinesregardingRemand:

1) Theperiodof24hoursbeginstorunthemomentapersonis
arrestedbyanypoliceofficer.
2) Fifteendaysoftimeforremandistobecountedfromthefirst
dateofproductionofaccusedbeforecourt.
3) Iftheaccusedisjuvenile,hisageistobeascertainedandifhe
findsthatheisjuvenile,thenhebedirectedtobeproduced
beforeJuvenileJusticeBoard.
4) Apersonheldinjudicialcustodycan,ifcircumstancesjustify,
betransferredtopolicecustodyorviceversawithinaperiodof
15 days referred to in section 167(2) of the Cr. P.C..
(Kasanapu Ramreddy..Vs.. State of A.P. & others AIR

1994SC1447).

Thearrestofapersonisaconditionprecedentfortakinghim
into judicial custody. (Directorate of Enforcement..Vs..Deepak

MahajanAIR1994SC1775).

Remandtopolicecustody:

1) It is plain that those 15 days being to run immediately

after the accused is produced before the Magistrate in accordance
withsubsection(1).Policecannot,therefore,begrantedcustodyof
theaccusedafterthelapseofthefirst15days.(1982Cri.LJ2366).

2) WhenaMagistrateremandsapersontopolicecustody,he
hastoconformtothreeconditions: (i)suchcustodyshouldnotbe
made of more than 15 days on the whole; (ii) reasons should be
recordedforpassingofsuchanorder:(iii)Acopyoftheorderandthe
 (9)PaperforWorkshop

reasonsshouldbesenttotheChiefJudicialMagistrate.

3) Beforepassinganorderremandingtheaccusedtopolice
custody,theMagistrateshouldfirstbesatisfiedthattheaccusations
againsthimarewellfounded.Forthispurposeheshouldnotonlygo
throughthecasediaryandthestatementsofwitnessesrecordedu/s
161, but he should scrutinize the record and decide whether the
formalitiesprescribedhavebeenfollowed.(1973Cri.LJ.869:1973
MadLJ157).

PoliceCustodyinBailableoffense:

Bail in bailable offenses is right of accused, However,

P.C.RcanbeclaimedbyI.Oinbailableoffensesubjecttocondition
thatiftheaccusedfailstofurnishsurety,then&thenonlyP.C.Rcan
beclaimed.Butassoonasaccusedfurnishessurety,theMagistrate
hastopassanorderofreleaseofaccusedforthwith.
a)AIR2009S.C.1341Yaman..Vs..StateofRajasthan.
b)AIR2009SC1362.

Magistratehasnopowertodischargeaccusedinsession
triablecases:
In the case of Ajay kumar Verma ..Vs.. State of
Rajasthan(AIR2013SC633)theHon'bleApexCourthasheldthat
theMagistratehasnopowertodischargeaccusedinsessiontriable
cases.

BAIL:

Bailinbailableoffence(S.436):

Inbailableoffencesbailisarightandnotafavour.Insuch
offencesthereisnoquestionofanydiscretioningrantingbail.Bail
canbeclaimedasofrightandthereisastatutorydutyimposedupon
thePoliceOfficeraswellastheCourttoreleaseapersononbailifhe
 (10)PaperforWorkshop

ispreparedtogivebail.Suchapersoncanalsobereleasedonhisown
bondinafitcase.Itisonlywheretheaccusedisunabletofurnish
bailthenheshouldbekeptindetention.

SofarasdiscretionofCourtingrantingbailinbailable
offenceisconcerned,theHonbleApexCourthasheldinthecaseof
Rasiklal..Vs..KishoreKhanchandWadwani(AIR2009SC1341=

2009CrLJ1887)asunder:

6. ..... Thepositionofpersonsaccusedofnonbailable
offenceisentirelydifferent.TherighttoclaimbailgrantedbySection
436oftheCodeinabailableoffenceisanabsoluteandindefeasible
right. In bailable offences there is no question of discretion in
grantingbailasthewordsofSection436areimperative.Theonly
choice available to the officer or the court is as between taking a
simple recognizance of the accused and demanding security with
surety.ThepersonscontemplatedbySection436cannotbetakeninto
custodyunlesstheyareunableorwillingtoofferbailortoexecute
personalbonds.Thereisnomannerofdoubtthatbailinabailable
offencecanbeclaimedbyaccusedasofrightandtheofficerorthe
court,asthecasemaybe,isboundtoreleasetheaccusedonbailifhe
iswillingtoabidebyreasonableconditionswhichmaybeimposedon
him.

Bailu/s436A:

Therehadbeeninstanceswhereundertrialprisonerswere
 (11)PaperforWorkshop

detained in jail for periods beyond the maximum period of

imprisonmentprovidedfortheallegedoffence.Anewsection436Ais
insertedintheCourttoprovidethatwhereanundertrialprisoner
otherthantheoffenceforwhichdeathhasbeenprescribedasoneof
thepunishments,hasbeenunderdetentionforaperiodextendingto
onehalf of the maximum period of imprisonment provided for the
allegedoffence,heshouldbereleasedonhispersonalbond,withor
withoutsureties.

It is also provided that in no case the undertrial be

detainedbeyondthemaximumperiodofimprisonmentforwhichhe
canbeconvictedfortheallegedoffence.

Bailinnonbailableoffence(S.437):

Section437oftheCodeofCriminalProceduregivesthe
CourtotherthantheHighCourtorCourtofSessionpowertorelease
accusedonbailinanonbailablecases,exceptwherethere appear
reasonable grounds that the accused has been guilty of an offence
punishablewithdeathorwithimprisonmentforlife. Butaperson
undertheageofsixteenyears;awoman;orasickorinfirmperson
maybereleasedonbaileveniftheoffencechargedispunishablewith
deathorimprisonmentforlife.

In the case of State of Rajasthan..Vs..Balchand AIR

1977 SC 2447= 1978 Cr LJ 195), the Honble Supreme Court by

observingthatbasicruleisbailandnotjailheldasunder:
 (12)PaperforWorkshop

The basic rule is bail, not jail, except where there are
circumstancessuggestiveoffleeingfromjusticeorthwartingthe
courseofjusticeorcreatingothertroublesintheshapeofrepeating
offencesorintimidatingwitnessesandthelikebythepetitionerwho
seeks enlargement on bail from the court. When considering the
question of bail, the gravity of the offence involved and the
heinousnessofthecrimewhicharelikelytoinducethepetitionerto
avoidthecourseofjusticemustweighwiththecourt.
Incaseof JayendraSarswatiSwamigal..Vrs..State

ofTamilnadu(AIR2005SC716),theHon'bleApexCourthaslaid

downthe followingfactorstobeconsideredatthetimeofdeciding
bailapplication:
TheconsiderationswhichnormallyweighwiththeCourt
ingrantingbailinnonbailableoffenseare
1) Thenatureofseriousnessofoffense;
2) thecharacterofevidence;circumstanceswhichare
peculiartotheaccused;
3) areasonablepossibilityofthepresenceoftheaccusednot
beingsecuredatthetrial;
4) reasonableapprehensionofwitnessesbeingtampered
with;
5) thelargerinterestofthepublicorthestateandtheother
similarfactorswhichmayberelevantinthefactsand
circumstancesofthecase.

Bailinnonbailableoffence(S.439):

Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure gives an

unfettereddiscretiontotheHighCourtorCourtofSessiontoadmit
 (13)PaperforWorkshop

an accused person to bail, but that discretion must be exercised

judicially.ThepoweroftheHighCourtandoftheCourtofSessionto
grantbailisnotfetteredbytherestrictionscontainedinsection437.

Factorstobetakenintoconsiderationforthegrantofbail
underthissectionaresubstantiallysameasthoseu/s438.Thereis
nosubstantialdifferencebetweensection438andsection439.The
onlydifferenceisthatu/s438,thepersonapproachestheCourtbefore
heisarrested;whereasu/s439heapproachestheCourtafterheis
arrested.
Inthecaseof SanjayChandra..Vs..C.B.I..popularly
knownas2GScam(2012)1SCC40,theHon'bleApexCourthas
observed aboutbail, itspurpose&howdiscretionshallbeusedin
casesinvolvingeconomicoffencesasunder.
40. The grant or refusal to grant bail lies within the
discretionoftheCourt.Thegrantordenialisregulated,toalarge
extent,bythefacts&circumstancesofeachparticularcase.Butat
thesametime,righttobailisnottobedeniedmerelybecauseofthe
sentiments of the community against the accused. The primary
purposes of bail in a criminal case are to relieve the accused of
imprisonment, to relieve the State of the burden of keeping him,
pending the trial, and at the same time, to keep the accused
constructively in the custody of the Court, whether before or after
conviction, to assure that he will submit to the jurisdiction of the
Court and be in attendance thereon whenever his presence is
required.

Anticipatorybail:

Inthecaseof GurbakshSinghSibbia&others..Vs..

StateofPunjab(AIR1980SC1632;1980CrLJ1125)inpara122

the Hon'ble Apex Court has laid down the following factors &
parameterswhichcanbetakenintoconsiderationwhiledealingwith
applicationforanticipatorybail:
 (14)PaperforWorkshop

i. Thenatureandgravityoftheaccusationandtheexactrole
oftheaccusedmustbeproperlycomprehendedbeforearrest
ismade;

ii. The antecedents of the applicant including the fact as to

whethertheaccusedhaspreviouslyundergoneimprisonmenton
convictionbyaCourtinrespectofanycognizableoffence;
iii. Thepossibilityoftheapplicanttofleefromjustice;
iv. Thepossibilityoftheaccused'slikelihoodtorepeatsimilaror
theotheroffences.
v. Wheretheaccusationshavebeenmadeonlywiththeobjectof
injuringorhumiliatingtheapplicantbyarrestinghimorher.
vi. Impactofgrantofanticipatorybailparticularlyincasesoflarge
magnitudeaffectingaverylargenumberofpeople.
vii. Thecourtsmustevaluatetheentireavailablematerialagainst
the accused very carefully. The court must also clearly
comprehendtheexactroleoftheaccusedinthecase.Thecases
inwhichaccusedisimplicatedwiththehelpofsections34and
149oftheIndianPenalCode,thecourtshouldconsiderwith
evengreatercareandcautionbecauseoverimplicationinthe
casesisamatterofcommonknowledgeandconcern;
viii. Whileconsideringtheprayerforgrantofanticipatorybail,a
balance has to be struck between two factors namely, no
prejudiceshouldbecausedtothefree,fairandfullinvestigation
andthereshouldbepreventionofharassment,humiliationand
unjustifieddetentionoftheaccused;
ix. Thecourttoconsiderreasonableapprehensionoftamperingof
thewitnessorapprehensionofthreattothecomplainant;
x. Frivolityinprosecutionshouldalwaysbeconsideredanditis
onlytheelementofgenuinenessthatshallhavetobeconsidered
inthematterofgrantofbailandintheeventoftherebeing
some doubt as to the genuineness of the prosecution, in the
normalcourseofevents,theaccusedisentitledtoanorderof
bail.
 (15)PaperforWorkshop

123.Thearrestshouldbethelastoptionanditshouldbe
restrictedtothoseexceptionalcaseswherearrestingtheaccusedin
imperativeinthefactsandcircumstancesofthatcase.

So far as imposition of conditions are concerned, the

Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Munish Bhasin & ors. ..Vs..
State(Govt.ofN.C.T.OfDelhi)&anr.(AIR2009SC2072) has
laiddownasunder:
CriminalP.C.(2of1974),S.438Anticipatorybail
Grant of Harsh, onerous, excessive, irrelevant or freakish
conditionscannotbeimposedonaccused.

Now very recently the apex court in the case of

Siddharam Satalingappa Mhetre ..Vs.. State of
Maharashtra (2011) 1 SCC 694 very elaborately and
exhaustively traced the evolutionary development and
expositionoftheconceptofanticipatorybailandenunciated
certain salient features and this exercise of this apex court
certainly very reflective and displays a rare jurisdictional
reasoninasmuchasthatwenowhaveaconceptuallyclear
positiononpracticallyeverylimbofthisprovision.
2. Alargenumberofpeoplearelanguishinginjailforalong
timebecauseS.438ofCr.P.Chasnotbeenallowedit'sfullplay.
TheobservationofsomecourtsthatS.438Cr.P.Cshouldbe
invokedonlyinexceptionalcasesorrarecasesiserroneous.
3. In the present vitiated, polluted and contaminated
politicalatmosphereofpresentday,ithasbecomefashionto
revenge the adversary by implicating him into false and
fabricated cases and involving bigwigs in many a time
unfoundedracketsandthesepracticesarenearingflashpoint,.
Itwasthereforeverynecessarythatprovisionsofanticipatory
bailbecomeliberalized.Ithasnowbeendone.
4. Inabarbaricsociety,youcanhardlyaskforbail;ina
civilizedsociety,youcanhardlyrefuseit.Thebailisaruleand
refusalisanexception.Libertyisprecioustoanindividualbut
simultaneously it is also important that societal interest of
 (16)PaperforWorkshop

maintenanceoflawandorderisadheredto.
5. Newdimensionswereaddedtotheprovisionofbail;and
new horizons were opened. It widened the powers of the
superiorCourts.Theprovisionforanticipatorybailwasmeant
fornonbailableoffences.Theprovisionofanticipatorybailwas
inthatnature.ItonlyoriginatedinIndianJudicialmind.It
wasinconsonancewithourcommitmenttoindividualliberty,
which implied scrutiny of every action of the investigating
agencyto provide effective check against arbitrariness and
abuseofsuchpower.
6. A direction u/s 438 is therefore intended to confer
conditional immunity from the 'touch' or confinement
contemplatedbysection46oftheCode.
7. Since denial of bail amounts to deprivation of personal
liberty, the Court should lean against the imposition of
unnecessaryrestrictionsonthescopeofsection438especially
whennotimposedbythelegislature.Anovergenerousinfusion
of constrains and conditions, which are not to be found in
section438,canmakeitsprovisionsconstitutionallyvulnerable
sincetherighttopersonalfreedomcannotbemadedependon
compliance with unreasonable restrictions. The beneficent
provisioncontainedinsection438mustbesaved,notjettisoned.
8. Anticipatory bail is a device to secure the individual's
liberty;itisneitherapassporttothecommissionofcrimesnor
a shield against any and all kinds of accusations, likely or
unlikely.
Statutorybail:

Bailundersection167(2)ofCr.P.C.ispopularlyknownas
defaultbail.Theaccusedisentitledtobereleasedonbailonaccount
ofdefaultonthepartoftheprosecutiontofileachargesheetunder
section173(2)withintheprescribedperiodof60daysor90
days.Theperiodof60daysor90dayscommencesfromthedateon
which the accused is remanded and not from the date of arrest.
(Chaganti Satyanarayana and others Vs. State of Andhra
 (17)PaperforWorkshop

Pradesh 1986 SCC (Cri.) 321, Central Bureau of

Investigation, Special Investigation, Special Investigation
Cell,NewDelhiVs.AnupamJ.Kulkarni1992(3)Bom.CR562
(SC).

Where a chargesheet was filed within the stipulated

periodofinvestigation,butcertainotherinformationsand
connectedpapersweresubmittedatalaterdate,eventhenitisheld
thatthechargesheetisfiledwithinthestipulatedstatutorytimeand
theaccusedisnotentitledtobereleasedunderprovisotosec.167(2)
Cr.P.C.Oncethechargesheetisfiled,withinthatperiodsection167
ceasestoapplyandtheaccusedcannotseekbailbyvirtueofproviso
toSection167(2).

If Bail application under section 167 (2) and

chargesheetarefiledonthesameday,timeforfilingapplicationis
crucial and not when Magistrate considered it (Jitendra
Maroti Deotare & anr., vs. State of Maharashtra, 2009 (2)
Bom.CR(Cri)687).

Meaningofthetermifnotavailedof

Theindefeasiblerightaccruingtotheaccusedis
enforceable only prior to the filing of the challan and it does not
surviveorremainenforceableonthechallanbeingfiled,if
alreadynotavailedof.Oncethechallanhasbeenfiled,
the questionofgrantofbailhastobeconsideredanddecidedonly
with reference to the merits of the case under the
provisionsrelatingtograntofbailtoanaccusedafterthe
filingofthechallan.Thecustodyoftheaccusedafterthechallan
hasbeenfiledisnotgovernedbySection167butdifferentprovisions
ofthe Cr.P.C. (SanjayDuttVs.StatethroughC.B.I.Bombay,
1994(5)SCC410)

The Hon'bleSupremeCourtin UdayMohanlal

Acharya Vs. State of Maharashtra, AIR 2001 SC 1910, by
majority it isheld thatTheexpressionifnotalreadyavailed of'
 (18)PaperforWorkshop

usedbythisCourtinSanjayDutt'scase(supra)mustbe
understood to mean when the accused files an application and is
preparedtoofferbailonbeingdirected.Inotherwords,onexpiryof
theperiodspecifiedinparagraph(a)ofprovisotosubsection(2)of
Section167iftheaccusedfilesanapplicationforbailandoffersalso
tofurnishthebail,onbeingdirected,thenithastobeheldthatthe
accusedhasavailedofhisindefeasiblerighteven thoughtheCourt
has notconsideredthe said application andhas notindicatedthe
termsandconditionsofbail,andtheaccusedhasnotfurnishedthe
same.
The Hon'ble Supreme Court in Sayed Mohd. Ahmed
KazmiVs.State,2013(1)Bom.CR(Cri)111whilediscussingthe
ratio laid down in Sanjay Dutt's case and other cases
observed that statutory right hasbeen oncethechargesheet had
beenfiledinthecaseandnoapplicationhasbeenmadeprior
theretoforgrantofstatutorybailextinguished.Itiswell
establishedthatifanaccuseddoesnotexercisehisrighttograntof
statutorybailbeforechargesheetisfiledhelooseshisrighttosuch
benefitoncesuchchargesheetisfiledandcanthereafteronlyapply
forregularbail.

MeaningofwordExtinguishingofRight

Accusedhas not applied for statutory bail before

charge sheet is filed.Meanwhile chargesheet is filed, the
right of accused of default bail stands extinguished as soon as
chargesheetcametobefiled.
TransitBail:

Quiteoftenithappensapersoncommitsacrimeinone
StateandiscaughtorapprehendedbythepoliceofanotherState.In
suchacasethepoliceoftheotherStatebywhichtheoffenderhas
been arrested produces him before the Magistrate. The Magistrate
thereuponordersthepolicetotake(transfer)oftheaccusedtothe
Stateinwhichhehascommittedtheoffence.Forthistransitofthe
accused the Magistrate has to pass an order either for his
remand,bail,etc..
 (19)PaperforWorkshop

InterimBail:

In suitable circumstances, court can grant interim bail

andcanthereafterconfirmsuchinterimbail[ PritamSingh..Vs..

StateofPunjab1980Cri.L.J.1174(Delhi)]

Thecourtcanalsograntinterimanticipatorybailas
persection438(1A)oftheCodeofCriminalProcedure.

CANCELLATIONOFBAILANDFORFEITUREOFBAIL
BONDS:

In case of a nonbailable offence, any court which has

releasedapersononbailmay,ifitconsidersitnecessaryso todo,
cancel the bail and direct that such person be arrested and
committedtocustodyasperSection437(5)oftheCode.Cancellation
necessarilyinvolvesareviewofdecisionalreadymadeandcanby
and large be only permitted if by way of supervening
circumstancesitwouldnolongerbeconducivetoafairtrialtoallow
theaccusedtoretainhisfreedomduringthetrial.

The bail once granted cannotbecanceledsuomoto

unlesscaseforcancellationofbailismadeoutafterhearingboththe
partiesonproperapplicationforcancellation.Ithasbeenheldinthe
case of R.J. Sharma..Vs..R.P. Patankar 1993 Cr L J 1993

(Bombay)thattheMagistrateoughttoperusetheapplicationfor

cancellationofbailandaffordanopportunitytotheaccusedto
beheard.
 (20)PaperforWorkshop

Thebasiccriteriaforcancellationofbailareinterference
orevenanattempttointerferewiththeduecourseofjusticeandor
any abuse of the indulgence/privilege granted to the accused. A
referenceofcaseofRamGovindUpadhyaya..Vs..SudarshanSing

2002CriL.J.1849(SC)isrelevant.

There is distinction between rejection of bail in non

bailablecaseattheinitialstageandthecancellationof
bailalreadygranted.Normally,verycogentandoverwhelming
groundsorcircumstancesarerequiredforcancellationofbailalready
granted asheldin the caseof SavitriAgarwalVs. State of

MaharashtraAIR2009SC3173.

FactorstobeconsideredforCancellationofBail:

As seen earlier, once the bail has been granted by the

Courteitheronmeritorindefault,itcanbecanceledonlyforvalid
reasons.Thenormalgroundsforcancelingthebailare:

1.Jumpingthebail,
2.Whenevertheaccusedbreachedanyconditionofbailbondhisbail
may be canceled. e.g. threatening or influencing the witnesses,
interferingwiththeinvestigationorprosecution,
3.WhenaccusedgotbailbyplayingfrauduponCourtorbygiving
wronginformationthebailmaybecanceled,
4.Theaccusedmisuseshislibertybyindulginginsimilaractivities.
5.Thereislikelihoodoftheaccusedfleeingawaytoanothercountry.
 (21)PaperforWorkshop

6. When accused has done or has tried to do something which

hampers or is likely to hamper administration of justice in any
manner,

The Court alsocan notcancelbailoncegrantedtothe

accused suo motu unless an application for cancellation of bail is
madeoutandafterhearingboththesides.Mereabsence
ofaccusedononeortwodatesbeforetheCourt,maynot
be a ground to cancel the bail. Sufficient reasonsmust be there
whilecancelingthebail.Theinabilityoftheaccusedalso
tobeconsidered.

The accused is released on bail u/s. 167(2)also

cannot be taken back in custody merely on filing of chargesheet,
which reveals the commission of a nonbailable offence
unlesstherearestronggrounds (AslamBabalalDesaiVs.State

ofMaharashtra,AIR1993SC1).

FORFEITUREOFBAILBONDS:

Section 446 of Criminal Procedure Code lays down the

procedureofforfeitureofbonds.Itdealswithtwoclassesofbonds1)
Bond under the Code for appearance or for production of property
beforeaCourtand2)BondstakenbyaCourtundertheCode.Action
u/s446canbetakenonlywhenthebondistakenbytheCourtunder
theprovisionsoftheCodesuchassection88forappearance.

Power to forfeitbondvestsintheCriminalCourtanda
 (22)PaperforWorkshop

Civil Court has no jurisdiction to entertain any suit about it. The
Codebeforewhichanappearanceistobemadeorpropertyistobe
producedortheCourttowhichthecaseissubsequentlytransferred
or,inrespectofthesecondclassofbonds,theCourtbywhichthe
bondwastaken,maysatisfyitselfastoforfeitureandcalluponthe
personboundbyiteithertopaythepenaltyortoshowcause.

Issuanceofshowcausenoticetothesuretyismust.The
Hon'ble Apex Court in Gulam Mehdi ..Vs.. State of Rajasthan

AIR 1960 SC 1185 that beforeasurety becomes liableto paythe

amountofthebondforfeiteditisnecessarytogivenotice,andifthe
suretyfailstoshowsufficientcauseonlythenthecourtproceedto
recover the money. Where no opportunity has been given to show
causewhyheshouldnotbemadetopay,theproceedingscannotbe
saidtobeinaccordancewithlawandshouldbequashed.

The following case laws are relevant for discussion of

today'sworkshop:

In thecaseof Mohd.Kunjuv Stateofkarnataka

reportedinAIR2000SC6,itisheldthat aforeignnationalwas

facing charges u/ss. 466 and 471, IPC ( forgery of Court record or
publicregisterandusingasgenuineaforgeddocument)andafew
other offences under the Foreigners Act, 1946 and the Passport
Act,1967.Hewasreleasedonboardandsecretlyslippedawayaboard.
His two sureties had undertaken to pay Rs.25,000 each. The
offences,though not trivial, were notvery serious either, the Court
 (23)PaperforWorkshop

hadnottakensurrenderofthepassportandtherewasnoconnivance
onthepartofthesureties.TheamountofpenaltywasreducedtoRs.
5000persurety.

Acontractofasuretyandthecontractofapersonreleased
onbailareindependentofeachother.Thesuretypromisestopay
acertainsumofmoneyifthepersonaccuseddoesnotappearatsome
timeandplaceasrequiredbylaw.Ifthatpersondoesnotappearthe
money is forfeited. Therecan benoquestion of thesuretymaking
effortstosecuretheattendanceofthepersonaccused,forhisbeing
badlytreatedbythatpersonorofhishavingmadeallthenecessary
effort which he could make. This is a simple contract. All he
undertakesistopayacertainsumofmoney,ifacertaineventdoes
notoccur,andifthateventdoesnotoccur,hemustpay.Thisbeingso,
asuretybondwouldbevalideventhoughthepersonaccuseddoesnot
himself sign the bond. (theBombayHighCourthasdissented

fromthisviewinthecaseofM.A.Gajbhiye,1974CrLJ1075)

DETENTION:
Policeofficershavebeenarmedwithextensivepowersto
preventcommissionofcognizableoffencesandtherelevantprovisions
arecontainedu/s.149to151.Ifthecommissionoftheoffencecannot
be otherwise prevented police can forthwith arrest the person so
designing(Section151).Themaximumperiodofdetentionu/s.151can
be for twenty four hours only, unless it is authorized or required
underanyothersectionoranyotherlaw.
 (24)PaperforWorkshop

Procedure:

Once a person has been arrested by the police under

section151(1),provisionsofSection167,Cr.P.C.,wouldbeattracted.
TheprovisionsofSections56to59mustbestrictlyfollowed. Ifthe
Police Officer thinks that further detention is necessary, he must
approachtheJudicialMagistratefornecessaryorders.
StateofMaharashtrahasmadeamendmentinsection151
w.e.f.27/05/1980andinsertedanewsubsection(3)tothissection.As
per this subsection, a duty is cast upon the Magistrate to
communicatethepersonproducedbeforehimthegroundsuponwhich
theorderhasbeenmadeandhehasbeendetainedandthathehas
righttomakearepresentationagainstthesaidordertotheCourtof
Sessions.
As per this amended subsection, such person/detenue
shallnotbedetainedforaperiodexceedingfifteendaysatatime,and
foratotalperiodexceedingthirtydaysfromthedateofarrestofsuch
person.

In the case of Ahemad Noormohamed Bhartii ..Vs..

State of Gujrat AIR 2005 Supreme Court, 2115, the Hon'ble

SupremeCourthasheldthat,Amereperusalofsection151ofthe
CodeofCriminalProceduremakesitclearthattheconditionsunder
whichaPoliceOfficermayarrestapersonwithoutanorderfroma
Magistrateandwithoutawarrant,havebeenlaiddowninS.151.He
candosoonlyifhehascometoknowofthedesignoftheperson
concernedtoconvictanycognizableoffence.Afurtherconditionfor
 (25)PaperforWorkshop

theexerciseofsuchpower,whichmustalsobefulfilled,isthatthe
arrest should be made only if it appears to the Police Officer
concerned that the commission of the offence cannot be otherwise
prevented.

Inthecaseof MedhaPatkar..Vs..StateofM.P.2008

CRI.L.J. 47 (MP), the Hon'ble MP High Court has held that

preconditionsofsection151,Cr.P.C.didnotexist,thearrestbypolice
ofthepetitionerandotheragitatorsfromtheroadwheretheywere
squatting and shouting was held to be in gross violation of their
fundamental rights under Article 19(1)(a) & 19(1)(b) of the
Constitution.

SurrenderofAccused:

As per Section 436 of Cr.P.C. various contingencies are

contemplatedi.e.anypersonotherthanapersonaccusedofanon
bailableoffenceisarrestedordetainedwithoutwarrantbyanOfficer
InchargeofaPoliceStationorappearsorisbroughtbeforeaCourt.
Inthesimilarmannerthesaidcontingencyiscontemplatedu/s.437
oftheCr.P.C..Thesurrenderofaccusedisthuscoveredbytheword
appearsasmentionedinthesesections.
Inthecaseof DineshBabulalThakkar..Vs..Stateof

Gujrat(2011Cr.L.J.1364GujratHighCourt)ithasbeenheldas

under:
 (26)PaperforWorkshop

CriminalP.C.(2of1974),S.436BombayPreventionof
GamblingAct(4of1887),Ss.4,5InformationTechnologyAct(21of
2000),S.66BailCaseregisteredagainstaccusedu/Ss.4and5of
Bombay Prevention of Gambling Act and S. 66 of Information
Technology Act No proceedings are pending before Magistrate
Accused has to first appear before Police Officer Incharge of Police
Station,furnishbailAndassoonasitappearsthataccusedperson
ispreparedtogivebail,PoliceOfficerisboundtoreleasehimonsuch
terms as to bail as may appear to be reasonable The accused
straightwaycannotappearandsurrenderbeforeMagistrate&furnish
bail&requestMagistratetoreleasehimonbailu/s436Procedure
whichisrequiredtobefollowedu/s436cannotbegivengobyemerely
becauseaccusedhasapprehensionthathewillnotbereleasedonbail.

PaperpreparedbyGroupACommittee:

(Smt.K.B.Agrawal) (V.S.Patil) (Smt.K.D.Shirbhate)

DistrictJudge2, CivilJudge,Sr.Dn., 2ndJt.CivilJudge,
Jalgaon. Jalgaon. Sr.Dn.,Jalgaon.

(P.G.Tayade) (A.M.Mankar)
4 Jt.CivilJudge,
th
5thJt.CivilJudge,
Sr.Dn.,Jalgaon Jr.Dn.,Jalgaon.