Regular bail in cheque dishonour proceedings granted on strict conditions to secure attendance and protect trial integrity.

In a cheque dishonour prosecution, the High Court granted regular bail under Section 439 CrPC after noting the petitioner's past non-appearance, warrants, and proclamation in connected Section 138 proceedings. The Court treated bail as a measure to secure attendance at trial and considered that the petitioner had already been enlarged on bail in a similar matter. Bail was therefore allowed on strict conditions, including furnishing a personal bond and local surety, and compliance with terms aimed at ensuring appearance, preventing interference with trial, and protecting the complainant's interest.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner, accused in a cheque dishonour case, was entitled to regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The petitioner had been denied bail below because of his repeated non-appearance, prior warrants, and proclamation in several connected complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The Court noted the nature of the case as one arising from cheque dishonour, the object of bail being to secure the accused's presence at trial, and the fact that in a similar matter the petitioner had already been released on bail. The Court found it appropriate to enlarge him on bail, but only on strict terms designed to secure attendance, prevent interference with the trial, and protect the complainant's interest.

Conclusion: The petitioner was held entitled to regular bail, subject to furnishing personal bond and local surety and to compliance with the imposed conditions.

---