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

2022 Supreme(Kar) 105

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
M. NAGAPRASANNA, J.
Sri Comanduru Parthasarathy, S/o Late Rajagopalan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka - Respondent
Criminal Petition No.2802 of 2022
Decided on : 21-04-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :SRI SANDESH CHOUTA, SR. ADVOCATE A/W SRI.NIKHIL.K., ADVOCATE)
For the Respondent: SRI.B.J.ROHITH, adv

Point of Law : Under subsection (4) of Section 20 TADA read with Section 167 of the Code and the Designated Court shall release him on bail, if the accused seeks to be so released and furnishes the requisite bail.

Headnote:

Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 437, 167, 167(2), 267, 270 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections, 107, 424, 427, 418, 421, 403, 406, 409, 411, 413, 414, 420, 468, 120, 120(A), 378, 405, 410, 415, 425, 463, 464, 117, 34 – Terrorist and Disruptive Activities (Prevention) Act, 1987 – 20(4) –Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 –Section 36-A(4) – Quash of criminal Proceeding – Seeking statutory/default bail – Arising out of Crime – Sought enlargement on bail – Para 21.

Finding of the court: Charge sheet is filed against the petitioner – This is plainly contrary to facts, as police filed charge sheet only against accused Nos.3 and 12 as could be seen from order sheet appended to the petition – This fact is undisputed – Contention of learned High Court Government Pleader is that once charge sheet is filed against any of accused other accused also would not be entitled to claim a right under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C – This, on face of it, is unacceptable, as it is fundamentally flawed – It is the case of prosecution itself that matter was pending investigation by police against petitioner/accused No.2. Even this day, it is case of High Court Government Pleader, that case against petitioner is still under investigation and on a plain mathematical calculation petitioner is now in custody for close, twice period of a right under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C.

Results: Criminal Petition is allowed.

ORDER :

The petitioner, in the subject petition, seeks to quash the order dated 29-01-2022 passed by the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru in C.C.No.2423 of 2022 arising out of Crime No.82 of 2021 and has consequently sought enlargement on bail in connection with the aforesaid crime which has been registered under Sections 107, 424, 427, 34, 418, 421, 403, 406, 409, 411, 413, 414, 420, 468, 120, 120(A), 378, 405, 410, 415, 425, 463, 464 and 117 of the Indian Penal Code.

2. Heard Sri.Sandesh Chouta, learned counsel for petitioner and Sri.B.J.Rohith, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent.

3. Sans unnecessary details, facts, in brief, germane for consideration of the issue in the lis are as follows:

    A crime in Crime No.82 of 2021 is registered by the Seshadripuram Police Station against the petitioner and several others for afore-quoted offences. In furtherance of the crime a body warrant and escort memo was issued against the petitioner who was in custody of WCO team-12 of the Central Crime Station (CCS) in Crime No.142 of 2021 at Hyderabad, in a different crime. The said body warrant was issued for production of the petitioner on or before 22-09-2021 before the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate at Bengaluru in connection with registration of the aforesaid crime. On 5-10-2021 the body warrant and escort memo was re-issued with a direction to produce the petitioner before the Court on or before 25-10-2021. The body warrant was executed in terms of the order of the Court on 20-10-2021 against the petitioner at Central Prison, Hyderabad and was produced before the Court at Bangalore in connection with Crime No.82 of 2021 on 21-10-2021 on the basis of the aforesaid body warrant so issued. On the very day, the petitioner was taken into custody and remanded to police custody in terms of the order passed by the Court.

4. The petitioner remained in police custody in connection with the crime from 21-10-2021 to 2-11-2021. On 26-10-2021, the petitioner was enlarged on bail by the Court at Hyderabad in connection with Crime No.142 of 2021 registered with Central Crime Station (CCS) at Hyderabad. In the light of release therein, the petitioner filed an application for bail under Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. in Crime No.82 of 2021. On the day of the application, the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody in terms of an order passed by the learned Magistrate and was placed at the Central Jail. The body warrant of the petitioner was further extended till 15-11-2021 by the learned Magistrate.

5. Objections were filed to the bail application filed under Section 437 of the Cr.P.C by the petitioner on 2-11-2021. Pending consideration of enlargement of the petitioner on bail in connection with Crime No.82 of 2021 at Bangalore, the Court at Hyderabad enlarges the petitioner on default bail in connection with another crime in Crime No.100 of 2021 owing to non-filing of charge sheet by the Police. At Bengaluru, the body warrant of the petitioner was further extended by the learned Magistrate till 28-12-2021. All these happened during the pendency of investigation by the Police at Bengaluru in Crime No.82 of 2021.

6. A preliminary charge sheet against accused Nos. 3 and 12 in connection with Crime No.82 of 2021 was filed by the Police on 18-12-2021 but no charge sheet was filed against the petitioner. On 20-01-2022 the period of 90 days from the date on which the petitioner was arrested expired. On the 95th day the petitioner files an application under Section 167 (2) of the Cr.P.C seeking statutory/default bail in connection with Crime No.82 of 2021 on the ground that no charge sheet was filed against him by the police in the aforesaid crime. The same was objected to by the State. Considering the application filed under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. an order is passed by the learned Magistrate on 29-01-2022 rejecting the statutory bail. On 23-03-2022 another order is passed rejecting regular bail application also fi

              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 Back to top