Magistrate While Accepting Chargesheet Has To Invariably Issue Summons, Not An Arrest Warrant

Name of the Case

Aman Preet Singh v. CBI

Key Takeaways

• A person accused of economic offences was issued a non-bailable warrant of arrest which he challenged before the Court.
• The Court while deciding the case observed that when it was not necessary to arrest a person during investigation process, it gives no ground to not grant bail to the person.
• The Court interpreted several section of the CrPC to understand the powers of the Court and the Investigating Officer.
• The Court also held that in a case, where the accused has not been arrested, the Court should issue a summons and not an arrest warrant.

Why the Petition

• A charge sheet had been filed against the accused for economic offences.
• The Chief Judicial Magistrate (CBI), Bhubaneshwar issued a non-bailable warrant of arrest against the accused.
• The Supreme Court noted that it was yet another instance based on a misinterpretation of Section 170.

What did the Court note

• When an OIC or Investigating Agency files a charge-sheet without arresting the accused during the investigation and does not produce the accused in custody as required the Court with jurisdiction has to accept the charge sheet immediately and proceed according to Section 173, CrPC.
• The Court has to record the reasons as mentioned under Section 87 of CrPC.
• The Court may give the accused direction to appear if an application for exemption from personal appearance is denied on any date of hearing. Nonappearance despite service of summons, absconding, or failure to obey summons does not constitute nonappearance despite service of summons.
• On the presentation of an accused in a bailable offence, the Court shall immediately release him on the provision of a personal bond with or without sureties, as required by Section 436.
• It is against the basic principle of law to refuse bail to a person on the basis of the offence he has committed when he has not been arrested during the investigation procedure, there is no reason to put him behind bars, he should be given bail.

What is the Order

• If someone accused in a non-bailable offence has been enlarged and free for several years and has never been arrested during an inquiry, ordering his detention just because a charge sheet has been filed would be inconsistent to the guiding criteria for grant of bail.
• If he wants to use his discretion to issue arrest warrants, he must record the reasons why the accused has been absconding, would not follow the summons, or has refused to attend despite proof of proper serving of the summons.
• It is not the duty of the OIC to arrest the accused on filing of a charge sheet.
• Arrest was prescribed by many Trial Courts as a pre requisite on filing the charge sheet on record but the intention of Section 170 would be contrary to that as held by in the case of Siddharth v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Anr.
• The Supreme Court stated that when a charge sheet is accepted, the Magistrate or the Court is required to issue a process of summons rather than an arrest warrant.

Do you think that persons accused for economic offences should be given bail? Tell us in the comments section below!