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

2023 Supreme(Bom) 1861

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
Revati Mohite Dere, Gauri Godse, JJ.
Amar Shamrao Kolekar - Appellant
Versus
State of Maharashtra - Respondent
Criminal Writ Petition (St) No. 16141 of 2023
Decided On : 08-09-2023

Advocates appeared:
Niranjan S.Mundargi, Advocate, Raviraj Paramane, Advocate, Keral Mehta, Advocate, Raviraj R.Paramane, Advocate, K.V.Saste, Advocate, D.D.Tele, Advocate

IMPORTANT POINT
The principle that personal liberty cannot be infringed without lawful authority, and that once bail is granted, an individual cannot be detained without a valid order.

Headnote:

HABEAS CORPUS - ILLEGAL CUSTODY - IPC Sec. 394, 411, 34; MCOC Act Sec. 3(1)(ii), 3(2), 3(4) - The court discussed the provisions of the Indian Penal Code and the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOC Act), emphasizing that the petitioner was granted bail in both cases and that there was no valid order for his continued detention. The court highlighted the importance of personal liberty and the requirement for lawful authority to detain an individual, ultimately concluding that the petitioner was in illegal custody and ordering his release.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

GAURI GODSE, J. - Rule. Rule is made returnable forthwith. rrpillai 2023:BHC-AS:26500-DB

1

2. By consent of the parties, the petition is taken up for final disposal.

3. This petition is filed seeking a writ in the nature of habeas corpus directing the respondents to produce the petitioner who, according to the petitioner, is in illegal custody of respondent no. 2.

4. For considering the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, it is necessary to note the following relevant dates : ? 21/7/2012 : CR No. 00/2012 came to be registered with the Lohmarg Police Station, Thane, for the offences punishable under Sec. 394 read with Sec. 34 of the IPC. ? 5/8/2012: FIR on transfer was re-registered as CR No. I-347/2012 with Rabale Police Station. ? 17/9/2012: Petitioner was arrested in connection with CR No. I-347/2012. ? 25/9/2012: Petitioner was released on bail pursuant to an order passed by the learned JMFC, Vashi, in connection with CR No.I- 347/2012. ? 12/12/2012: Charge-sheet was filed in connection with CR No. I-347/2012 by invoking the provisions of the MCOC Act against the petitioner and two other accused. ? 27/12/2022: The other two accused in the said CR No. I- 347/2012 were convicted and sentenced after pleading guilty before the trial Court. ? 3/3/2023: Non-bailable warrant was issued against the petitioner by the learned Special Judge, Thane. ? 23/7/2023: The petitioner came to be arrested in connection with another case, being CR No. I-122/2023 registered with Thane Nagar Police Station for the alleged offence punishable under Sec. 379 of the IPC. ? 27/7/2023: On an application made for a production warrant before the Special Court Thane, a production warrant was issued and the same was made returnable on 4/8/2023 in connection with CR No. I- 347/2012 for the offence punishable under Sec. 394, 411, 34 of the IPC and Sec. 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of the MCOC Act. ? 28/4/2023: The petitioner was ordered to be released on bail in connection with CR No. I-122/2023. Accordingly, a release memo was received by the jail authorities. ? 4/8/2023: The petitioner was produced before the learned Special Judge, Thane, pursuant to the production warrant. The petitioner had made an application for cancellation of the production warrant, however, the same was rejected by the learned Special Judge by recording that the petitioner is already apprehended. ? 8/8/2023: The petitioner was put to notice regarding filing of an an application seeking cancellation of his bail granted in the year 2012 in connection with CR No. I-347/2012.

5. In view of the petitioner not being released in spite of his application for bail being granted, the petitioner, on 30/8/2023, filed the present petition seeking a writ of habeas corpus, as according to the petitioner, he was in illegal custody of respondent no. 2.

6. On 5/9/2023, we heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the petition was adjourned for today to enable the learned APP to take instructions. In the meantime, the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Court No. 11, Belapur, before whom the application was filed by the State for cancellation of the petitioner's bail, was pending was directed not to pass any order till the next date.

7. The learned counsel for the petitioner, by referring to the aforesaid dates and events, submitted that there were two CRs registered against the petitioner; however, he was granted bail in both CRs. Learned counsel further submitted that in CR of the year 2012, the petitioner was released on bail on 25/9/2012.

8. The learned counsel further submitted that in CR No.I-122/2023, though the petitioner was ordered to be released on bail by an order dtd. 28/7/2023, and a release memo was also received by the jail authorities, the petitioner was illegally detained by respondent no. 2. Learned counsel submitted that thereafter, the petitioner was produced before the learned Special Judge on 4/8/2023. On that date, an application was filed on behalf of the

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

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