S I SUDERSHAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE learned Sessions Judge, refused anticipatory bail mainly on the ground that in a case where non -bailable warrants are issued in a complaint case section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not applicable. Mr. Walia relies on a recent authority of this Court reported in Balwant Singh and others v. State of Punjab, 1983(1) CLR 473, where under similar circumstances, the petitioners were allowed anticipatory bail. A direction is issued in the name of the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ludhiana, which issued the non -bailable warrants or the officer to whom the warrants have been entrusted for execution, to release the petitioners on bail on his furnishing surety to the satisfaction of such Court or such officer in the event of the execution of the warrants. The petitioner shall attend the Court of Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana, on each date fixed in the case. He shall not in any way or any manner tamper with the prosecution evidence or offer inducement or threat or any promise to any person on the side of the prosecution to deter him from making any truthful narration of the events to his knowledge in the Court. The petitioner shall not abscond, jump bail or place himself beyond the reach of the Court during pendency of the case against him. He shall also not leave the country without the permission of the Court. Petition allowed.