- (1.) Heard both the counsels. The petitioner has been made an accused in connection with Complaint Case No. C/1 1959 of 2010 registered under Sections 138 of N.I. Act.
(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that initially he was granted bail in the matter on 02.06.2012 and subsequently his bail was cancelled on 22.6.2013. However, he is in custody since 27.4.2016. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted initially he has already been granted bail on merits and then he defaulted on the privilege of bail. Moreover he has stated that offence under Section 138 N.I. Act is bailable in nature.
(3.) Mr. Sanjay Kr. Pandey, learned counsel for the informant has submitted that at initial stage petitioner was present through his production warrant. Finally he has read out Section 436 (2)of Cr.P.C and said that petitioner cannot be allowed bail in this case. Section 436 (2)of Cr.P.C is reproduced hereinbelow.: - "Notwithstanding anything contained in sub - section(1), where a person has failed to comply with the conditions of the bail -bond as regards the time and place of attendance, the Court may refuse to release him on bail, when on a subsequent occasion in the same case he appears before the Court or is brought in custody and any such refusal shall be without prejudice to the powers of the Court to call upon any person bound by such bond to pay the penalty thereof under Section 446." ;