Whether Section 324 Of Ipc Is Bailable Or Non-Bailable
I deem that it is very interesting to discuss as to section 324 of Indian Penal Code,1860 is now bailable offence or non-balibale offence. If you go through Section 42 sub-section (f)(iii) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2005 (No. 25 of 2005) which says section 324 of Indian Penal Code,1860 is non-bailable offence. Yet, many people ignores that this Amendment was followed by a Notification dated 21st June, 2006 in the Gazette of India. According to this notification, section 324 of Indian Penal Code,1860 is not non-bailable offence. Because of ignorance of this notification, in some of places, the persons ,who arrested for the offence under section 324 of IPC, could not get bail immediately, despite it is still bailable offence.
– At this juncture, I deem that it is appropriate to refer, to remember the importance of granting bail, the land mark ruling delivered by the Hon’ble Justice Krishnaiyer, V.R. In ” STATE OF RAJASTHAN, JAIPUR Vs BALCHAND @ BALIAY”,1977 AIR 2447, 1978 SCR (1) 535; HELD : The basic rule is bail, not jail, except-where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the court. When considering the question of bail, the gravity of the offence involved and the heinousness of the crime which are likely to induce the petitioner to avoid the course of justice must weigh with the court. In the instant case the circumstances and the social milieu do not militate against the petitioner being granted bail on monetary suretyship at this stage. At the same time any possibility of the abscondence or evasion or other abuse can be taken care of by a direction that the petitioner will report himself before the police station once every fortnight. He was on bail throughout the trial but was released after the judgment of the High Court, there is nothing to suggest that he has abused the trust placed in him by the court. He is not it desperate character or an unsocial element who is likely to betray the confidence that the court may place on him to turn up to take justice at the hands of the court.
Act 5 of 2009:
From 31st December, 2009 onwards, Section 324 of IPC is no compaundable. Yet, it is still bailable offence as per the Notification dated 21st June, 2006 inasmuch as Section 42(f)(iii) of CrPC Amendment Act, 2005 was excluded.
What Section 42 sub-section (f)(iii) of Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2005 (No. 25 of 2005) says :
It says as infra:
42. Amendment of the First Schedule.-In the First Schedule to the principal Act, under the heading “I.-OFFENCES UNDER THE INDIAN PENAL CODE”,-
(f) in the 5th column, in the entries relating to-
(iii) section 324, for the word “Ditto”, the word “Non-bailable” shall be substituted;
This Amendment was followed by a Notification dated 21st June, 2006 in the Gazette of India :
MINISTRY OF HOME AFFAIRS
New Delhi, the 21st June, 2006
S. O. 923(E).- In exercise of the powers conferred by sub-section (2) of section 1 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2005 (No. 25 of 2005), the Central Government hereby appoints the 23rd June, 2006, as the date on which the provisions of the said Act, except the provisions of Sections 16, 25, 28(a), 28(b), 38, 42(a), 42(b) 42(f) (iii) and (iv) and 44(a), shall come into force.
[F. No. 2/5/90-Judl Cell (Vol VIII)]
Dr. P. K. SETH, Jt. Secy.
The Notification vividly says that Section 42(f)(iii) of Cr.P.C Amendment Act, 2005 is excluded and therefore not yet enforced. Which means that Section 324 of Indian Penal Code (IPC) continues to be a bailable offence but is not non-bailable.
Mulling over all these facts and keeping in view of the above notification, it is vividly known that section 324 of IPC is still bailable offence.