Joginder @ Jindi Vs.
State of Haryana  INSC 1518 (8 September 2008)
[Dr. Arijit Pasayat
and Harjit Singh Bedi, JJ] The following Order of the was delivered Heard
learned senior counsel for the petitioner.
Since the petitioner
alleges that the offences charged are bailable offences, the High Court was not
justified in holding that custodial interrogation was necessary. Section 438
Cr.P.C. in terms relates to non- bailable offences. Therefore, a petition under
Section 438 Cr.P.C. in relation to bailable offences is mis-conceived, even if
it is accepted that alleged offences are bailable. However, if the petitioner
surrenders and seeks regular bail, the same shall be considered uninfluenced by
any observations made by the High Court. The special leave petition is disposed
Pages: 1 2