<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>1984 (3) TMI 440 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299658</link>
    <description>Section 204 CrPC allows a Magistrate to issue summons or warrant according to the nature of the case, and there is no general rule requiring a bailable warrant first merely because the accused has not obtained anticipatory bail. Section 438 CrPC turns on apprehension of arrest for a non-bailable offence, and that apprehension may arise from police action or from process issued by a Magistrate. The Magistrate&#039;s choice to issue a bailable or non-bailable warrant may affect discretion, but it does not end the jurisdiction of the High Court or Court of Session to consider anticipatory bail; only where anticipatory bail has already been granted does Section 438(3) require compliance with that protection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Dec 2021 12:33:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=665062" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>1984 (3) TMI 440 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299658</link>
      <description>Section 204 CrPC allows a Magistrate to issue summons or warrant according to the nature of the case, and there is no general rule requiring a bailable warrant first merely because the accused has not obtained anticipatory bail. Section 438 CrPC turns on apprehension of arrest for a non-bailable offence, and that apprehension may arise from police action or from process issued by a Magistrate. The Magistrate&#039;s choice to issue a bailable or non-bailable warrant may affect discretion, but it does not end the jurisdiction of the High Court or Court of Session to consider anticipatory bail; only where anticipatory bail has already been granted does Section 438(3) require compliance with that protection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Mar 1984 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=299658</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>