Non-bailable warrant discretion upheld where gravity of allegations and accused police personnel justified refusal to convert to bailable warrant.

Personal liberty may be curtailed by procedure established by law, and the trial court may issue a non-bailable warrant where the circumstances justify that discretion. In this matter, the gravity of the allegations, including that the accused were police personnel alleged to have assaulted the complainant's son at the police station, was treated as a relevant factor. The precedent relied on was distinguished because it did not involve officers in a position of authority and responsibility. No perversity or illegality was found in refusing to convert the warrant into a bailable warrant, and the trial court's order was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the trial court was justified in issuing a non-bailable warrant of arrest instead of first resorting to summons or bailable warrant, and whether the order rejecting conversion of the warrant into a bailable warrant suffered from illegality.

Analysis: Personal liberty is fundamental, but it is not absolute and may be curtailed by procedure established by law. Issuance of a non-bailable warrant is one such procedure under the Code of Criminal Procedure. The gravity of the allegations, including the accused being police personnel alleged to have assaulted the complainant's son in the police station, was treated as a relevant circumstance in exercising the trial court's discretion. The cited precedent was distinguished on facts because it did not concern police personnel occupying a position of authority and responsibility. No perversity or illegality was found in the exercise of discretion by the trial court.

Conclusion: The trial court's order issuing the non-bailable warrant and declining conversion into a bailable warrant was upheld.

---