Section 81 bail power is limited to warrant executions, not arrests without warrant or wider territorial jurisdiction.

The second proviso to Section 81 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is confined to arrests made in execution of warrants under Section 78 and does not create a general power for the Chief Judicial Magistrate or Court of Session at the place of arrest to grant bail in warrantless arrest cases. Reading Sections 41, 55, 56, 57, 70 to 81 together, the court held that the statutory scheme separates arrests without warrant from warrant executions, and territorial jurisdiction cannot be enlarged by implication. The impugned bail order was therefore beyond the jurisdiction conferred by the Code in the circumstances of the case.

---

---

Issues: Whether the second proviso to Section 81 of the Code of Criminal Procedure authorises the Chief Judicial Magistrate or the Court of Session at the place of arrest to grant bail to a person arrested without warrant, and whether that power extends beyond arrests made in execution of a warrant under Section 78.

Analysis: The statutory scheme distinguishes arrests without warrant from arrests in execution of warrants. Sections 41, 55, 56 and 57 govern arrest without warrant and production before the Magistrate having jurisdiction in the case, while Sections 70 to 81 deal with warrants of arrest. The second proviso to Section 81 is read as a limited enabling provision tied to Section 78(2), which requires the warranting court to forward the substance of the information and documents so that the Magistrate or Sessions Judge at the place of arrest may decide bail in cases of warrants executed outside jurisdiction. The language, context, and placement of Section 81 show that it does not create a general bail power for courts at the place of arrest in cases not covered by Section 78. Jurisdiction in criminal matters ordinarily follows the situs of the offence, and a court cannot enlarge its own jurisdiction by implication.

Conclusion: The second proviso to Section 81 applies only to persons arrested in execution of warrants under Section 78 and does not empower the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Moradabad to grant bail to the petitioner in the present case.

Final Conclusion: The petition failed because the impugned bail order was beyond the jurisdiction conferred by the Code on the court at the place of arrest in a warrantless arrest case.

Ratio Decidendi: The power to grant bail under the second proviso to Section 81 is confined to arrests made in execution of warrants under Section 78 and cannot be extended to arrests without warrant or to courts lacking territorial jurisdiction over the offence.

---