SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1992 Supreme(AP) 43

M.N.RAO, N.D.PATNAIK, P.VENKATRAMA REDDY
Kurra Dasaratha Ramaiah – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent


M. N. RAO, J.

( 1 ) THIS criminal petition filed by A-1, A-6 and A-13 (three of the thirteen accused) in Crime No. 35/91 of Bapatla Taluk Police Station for alleged offences punishable under Ss. 120b, 44b, 147, 148, 302 read with 149 of the Indian Penal Code, seeking enlargement on bail pending enquiry and trial, has gravitated from a learned single Judge to a Division Bench and eventually to this Full Bench, the question for resolution being :"whether non-availability of police escort constitutes a valid ground for extending the period of remand of an accused person by a Magistrate under S. 167 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure ?"how the reference has arisen :- The three petitioners herein are among the 13 accused in Crime No. 35/91 of the Bapatla Taluk Police Station. They were arrested on 19-7-91 and produced before the II Addl. Munsif Magistrate, Bapatla on 20-7-91 when an order was passed by the learned Magistrate remanding them to judicial custody for 14 days. Thereafter the remand was extended on six occasions - 5-8-91, 16-8-91, 27-8-91, 10-9-91, 18-9-91 and 1-10-91 without the police producing the petitioners before the learned Magistrate. The charge sheet was filed on
























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top