Preserving Liberty: Court Strikes Down Non-Bailable Warrants, Emphasizing Fundamental Rights and Procedural Fairness
Title: M/s Yoon Automobiles Enterprises Pvt. Ltd vs M/s Bhilai Engineering Corporation Limited
Citation: CRMP No. 2584 of 2023
Coram: Justice Rakesh Mohan Pandey
Decided on: 10-11-23.
Introduction:
The case involves a group of individuals (petitioners) against whom non-bailable warrants have been issued by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class in Durg. The charges stem from complaint cases filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act (NI Act), indicating a legal action related to dishonor of negotiable instruments such as checks. The issuance of non-bailable warrants suggests the seriousness of the legal proceedings against the petitioners in these cases.
Facts:
The case involves complaint cases under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, where the petitioners face non-bailable warrants issued by the trial court. The complaints were filed for dishonor of cheques amounting to Rs. 25,00,000 each, issued by the petitioners in favor of the complainant. The petitions under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. were filed seeking permission to present defense evidence, especially for those petitioners who are not directors of the company mentioned in the cases.
During the proceedings, applications under Section 317 of Cr.P.C. were submitted, seeking an adjournment. However, the trial court rejected these applications, leading to the issuance of non-bailable warrants against the petitioners. In response, the petitions challenging these orders were filed.
The counsel for the petitioners argues that, according to the Supreme Court’s decision in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation (2022) 10 SCC 51, non-bailable warrants should not be issued at the first instance in summon cases under the Negotiable Instruments Act. Instead, the court should issue notices and bailable warrants before resorting to non-bailable warrants, especially when the accused or their counsel are present before the court. The petitioners seek relief based on these legal arguments.
Judgement analysis:
The judgment, considering the precedent set by the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the procedural aspects, deems the issuance of non-bailable warrants against the petitioners as legally unsustainable. It emphasizes that the liberty of individuals, a fundamental and inalienable right under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, cannot be curtailed arbitrarily.
The court notes that the learned Trial Court did not provide any rationale for issuing non-bailable warrants when the counsel for the petitioners was present, and applications under Section 317 of Cr.P.C. were submitted. Consequently, the court sets aside the orders of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class issued on November 3, 2023. It allows the applications under Section 317 of Cr.P.C., directing the petitioners to appear before the Court below on the next date of the hearing. All the petitions are thereby disposed of.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written By: Gauri Joshi