PUNEET SINGH CHAUHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this common order, both these petitions are disposed of.

(2.) The apprehension of the counsel for the petitioners is that on appearance before the learned Metropolitan Magistrate pursuant to the non-bailable warrants they may not be released on bail in spite of the fact that the offence is bailable. This apprehension appears to be misplaced as in bailable offence the power of the Magistrate to procure the presence of the accused who has not been appearing despite service of summons by way of warrant of arrest with the direction to produce the accused before him is solely for the purpose of procuring his presence and the moment such a person is either produced in execution of warrant of arrest or appear on his own has to be released on furnishing bond with or without surety as liberty of no person can be curtailed, abridged or put in shelf in a case where he is entitled to be released on bail.

(3.) Power to procure the presence of the accused through warrant of arrest flows from Section 89 of Cr.P.C which reads as under:-