Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: bail in bailable offence in Jivrajbhai Ramjibhai Patel & vs State Of Gujarat & on 28 March, 2017Matching Fragments
"10. In the case of Anwar Hussain v. State of Orissa, 1995 CrLJ 863, it is stated as under :
"5. Chapter XXXIII consists of Secs. 436 to 450. Sections 436 and 437 provides for the granting of bail to accused persons before trial and conviction. For the purposes bail offences are classified into two category i.e. (i) bailable, and (ii)non-bailable. Section 436 provides for granting bail in bailable cases and Sec.437 in non-bailable cases. A person accused of bailable offence is entitled to be released on bail pending his trial. In case of such offences, a police officer has no discretion to refuse bail if the accused is prepared to furnish surety. The Magistrate gets jurisdiction to grant bail during the course of investigation when the accused is produced before him. In bailable offence, there is no question of discretion for granting bail. The only choice for the Court is as to taking a simple recognizance of the principal offender or demanding security with surety. Persons contemplated by this Section cannot be taken into custody unless they are unable or unwilling to offer bail or to execute personal bond. The Court has no discretion, when granting bail under this Section, even to impose any condition except the demanding of security with sureties."
12. In the case of Azeez v. State of Kerala,1984 2 Crimes 413, the Kerala High Court observed as under :
"3. The petitioner, being a person accused of only HC-NIC Page 4 of 9 Created On Sun Aug 13 20:55:53 IST 2017 R/SCR.A/1402/2017 ORDER bailable offence, has aright to be enlarged on bail. There is no discretion with the Court enabling it to grant or refuse bail. The Court is required to grant bail in such a case,though the Court is at liberty to modulate the terms as to bail. This certainly does not mean that the Court can impose a condition which is not a term as to bail. The condition that a person accused of bailable offence has to surrender his passport in Court is not a term as to bail, and therefore, cannot be imposed by a Magistrate under Sec. 436 of the Code. The condition imposed is illegal and has to be set aside."
13. In the case of Hanumanthe Gowda & Anr. v. State of Karnataka, it is held as under :
"The wordings of the three Sections make it clear that under Sec. 436 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, there is no discretion left to the Court to impose a condition while releasing a person on bail when he is accused of a bailable offence. I am in respectful agreement with the judgments cited above of the Madras High Court. I, therefore, hold that the conditions imposed by the learned Magistrate while granting bail to the petitioners are without jurisdiction and they are accordingly set aside except releasing the petitioners on bail on their executing a personal bond for Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety for like sum for their appearance."
14. In the case of Kanubhai Chhaganlal Brahmbhatt v. State of Gujarat& Ors., 1972 GLR 748 it is held that the whole question of producing the accused before a Magistrate would only arise if the accused was not prepared to give bail before the police officer after his arrest and even when he is produced before the Magistrate and he is prepared to give bail, the Magistrate has no option but to release him on bail so far as bailable offence is concerned.