In Brief
The Supreme Court interpreted Section 88 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which allows courts to take bonds for appearance. The appellant, charged with serious offences including corruption, was not arrested during investigation but applied to be released on bond under Section 88. The trial court and High Court rejected this application. The Court held that the word 'may' in Section 88 grants discretionary power, not a mandatory right. Section 88 applies only to free persons; once a non-bailable warrant is issued, the accused must pursue bail under Section 437. The Court disposed of the appeal, directing the appellant to file a proper bail application considering his disability claim.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.