Step 1: Understanding the Concept:
The question asks for the specific provision in law where the terms 'bailable offence' and 'non-bailable offence' are defined.
Step 2: Detailed Explanation:
These are procedural terms related to bail, so their definition would be in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), not the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Section 2 of the CrPC contains definitions.
- Section 2(a) of the CrPC defines "bailable offence". It states:
"'bailable offence' means an offence which is shown as bailable in the First Schedule, or which is made bailable by any other law for the time being in force; and 'non-bailable offence' means any other offence."
This single sub-section defines both terms. It defines 'bailable offence' affirmatively (by referring to the First Schedule of the CrPC) and 'non-bailable offence' negatively (as any offence that is not bailable).
- Section 2(b) defines 'charge'.
- Section 2(c) defines 'cognizable offence'.
- Section 20 of the IPC defines 'Court of Justice'.
Step 3: Final Answer:
'Bailable offence' and 'non-bailable offence' are defined in Section 2(a) of the CrPC.
Having heard the learned Counsels for the parties, and on perusal of the ma terial on record, the primary issue which arises for consideration of this Court is ”whether a review or recall of an order passed in a criminal proceeding initiated under section 340 of CrPC is permissible or not?” [...] A careful consideration of the statutory provisions and the aforesaid decisions of this Court clarify the now-well settled position of jurisprudence of Section 362 of CrPC which when summarized would be that the criminal courts, as envisaged under the CrPC, are barred from altering or reviewing in their own judgments except for the exceptions which are explicitly provided by the statute, namely, correction of a clerical or an arithmetical error that might have been committed or the said power is provided under any other law for the time being in force. As the courts become functus officio the very moment a judgment or an order is signed, the bar of Section 362 CrPC becomes applicable. Despite the powers provided under Section 482 CrPC which, this veil cannot allow the courts to step beyond or circumvent an explicit bar. It also stands clarified that it is only in situations wherein an application for recall of an order or judgment seeking a procedural review that the bar would not apply and not a substantive review where the bar as contained in Section 362 CrPC is attracted. Numerous decisions of this Court have also elaborated that the bar under said provision is to be applied stricto sensu.
(Extracted with edits and revisions from Vikram Bakshi v. RP Khosla 2025 INSC 1020)