TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether the petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was maintainable when filed through a power of attorney holder. (ii) Whether non-bailable warrants could be issued against the petitioner in the absence of the statutory preconditions under section 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Issue (i): Whether the petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was maintainable when filed through a power of attorney holder.
Analysis: The petitioner was a resident outside India and the impugned warrants prevented personal appearance in India. The Court held that the exceptional nature of proceedings under section 482 of the Code did not justify rejection solely because the petition was presented through a power of attorney holder, particularly where the circumstances explained the absence of the petitioner himself.
Conclusion: The petition was maintainable and the objection was rejected.
Issue (ii): Whether non-bailable warrants could be issued against the petitioner in the absence of the statutory preconditions under section 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Analysis: The power to issue non-bailable warrants during investigation exists only within the confines of section 73 of the Code, which applies to an escaped convict, a proclaimed offender, or a person accused of a non-bailable offence and evading arrest. The petitioner was shown in the summons and MLAT request as a witness, and not as an accused. In these circumstances, non-compliance with summons could at most attract proceedings under section 174 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, but did not satisfy the statutory basis for issuance of non-bailable warrants. The Court further held that a court cannot resort to a coercive process unless the statute authorises it in the manner prescribed.
Conclusion: The non-bailable warrants were unsustainable and stood cancelled.
Final Conclusion: The impugned order was set aside and the petitioner obtained complete relief against the non-bailable warrants, while no finding was returned on the merits of the underlying enforcement proceedings.
Ratio Decidendi: Non-bailable warrants can be issued only on fulfilment of the specific statutory conditions in section 73 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and a person shown merely as a witness in investigation cannot be subjected to that coercive process on the basis of non-compliance with summons alone.
TaxTMI 
