Accused Not Arrested in Investigation Cannot Be Sent to Custody After Charge-Sheet Merely for Bail: Rajasthan High Court

An FIR of 2022 alleged that the constitution of a Jodhpur educational society had been amended and the amendments approved by fabricating the minutes of a general body meeting, with allegations of cheating and forgery (paras 1, 8). The investigating agency never arrested the petitioners, and the High Court had protected them from arrest until the challan was filed (paras 3, 8). As they did not appear when the challan was filed, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur Metropolitan, by an order of 19.02.2026 and without taking cognizance, issued bailable warrants and observed that their bail would be considered on appearance (paras 1, 9). They challenged that order under Section 528 BNSS (para 1).

The agency never found it necessary to arrest the petitioners (para 8). The warrants were issued only to secure their appearance, which summons could have achieved, and nothing showed that they were likely to abscond, tamper with evidence or evade the process of law (para 9). Following Siddharth, Section 170 CrPC does not require the arrest of every accused when the charge-sheet is filed; 'custody' there means presentation before the Court, not police or judicial custody (para 10). Under Satender Kumar Antil, no bail application is needed in such cases and presence can be secured by bonds under Section 88 CrPC (paras 11-12). Citing Inder Mohan Goswami, the Court held that warrants, bailable or non-bailable, cannot issue without proper scrutiny of facts and application of mind; where the agency did not arrest the accused, warrants should be used only for heinous offences with a clear likelihood of absconding, tampering or evasion (paras 13-14). Here the offences were not heinous, the case rested mainly on documents, and the petitioners were willing to appear, so the trial court ought not to insist on custody merely to accept bail bonds (paras 15-16).