138 ni-summons case-bail bonds or surety bonds-mandatory or imperative?

Tilak Marg Forum for Legal Questions Forums Criminal Law 138 ni-summons case-bail bonds or surety bonds-mandatory or imperative?

This topic contains 1 reply, has 2 voices, and was last updated by Dr. Ashok Dhamija Dr. Ashok Dhamija 6 months, 2 weeks ago.

  • Author
  • #4123

    respected sir
    whether in a 138 ni case is it mandatory or imperative on the part of the court, at the very first appearance of the accused in the court, to take bail bonds or surety bonds of the accused? 138 ni act being a summons case cannot he/she be released on personal bond only? any judgement or authority of any high court preferably of madras or andhra high courts.please advice.
    i have already posted this query under the title-{ 138 ni-83(1) crpc-receiver of moveable property-‘articles belonging to’ or fixtures’ }.

  • #4131

    The offence of cheque bounce under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is a bailable offence. In view of this, considering the provisions of Section 436 of the Criminal Procedure Code, it is permissible for the Magistrate to release the accused only on a personal bond. It is not mandatory to always insist for the bail bond of sureties. Language of Section 436 Cr.P.C. itself clear in this regard, and there should be no need for any judgment in this regard.


    Dr. Ashok Dhamija is a New Delhi based Supreme Court Advocate and author of law books. Read more about him by clicking here. List of his Forum Replies. List of his other articles. List of his Quora Answers.

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

You may also like to read these topics:

Can accused get bail from Supreme Court immediately after its rejection by High Court?
Seeking anticipatory bail after lower court issued warrant for non-appearance?
police totally involved in sheilding an influential accused
Accident case in 279/337 and 427

Facebook Comments