Back
DELHI HIGH COURT
Suresh Kait, J.
Sudesh Kumar @ Sudesh Chand - Appellant
Versus
C.B.I. - Resopndent
Bail Application No. 1626 of 2009
Decided On : 16-01-2012
Wildlife Protection Act - Bail - Sections 49, 49B(1) of Wildlife Protection Act 1972 - Summary of the acts and sections referenced and discussed by the court: The court discussed the provisions of Sections 49 and 49B(1) of the Wildlife Protection Act 1972, as well as the provisions of the Maharashtra Control of Organized Crime Act, 1999 (MCOCA) and Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The court highlighted the requirement for filing a charge sheet within 90 days, the invocation of MCOCA, and the implications of delayed supplementary complaints under MCOCA.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought bail in a case related to the Wildlife Protection Act. The petitioner had been arrested and released on bail, but was re-arrested by the CBI under MCOCA. The supplementary complaint under MCOCA was filed more than three years after the re-arrest, leading to the petitioner spending almost seven years in judicial custody.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the supplementary complaint under MCOCA was not filed within the required 90 days, and the petitioner had spent an extended period in custody. The court concluded that the petitioner had made a prima facie good case for bail and granted bail.
Issues: The issues included the delay in filing the supplementary complaint under MCOCA, the petitioner's prolonged custody, and the entitlement to bail under the relevant provisions.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the delay in filing the supplementary complaint under MCOCA, beyond the prescribed 90 days, entitled the petitioner to bail. The court also considered the petitioner's extended period in custody as a factor in granting bail.
Final Decision: The court allowed the petitioner's bail application and ordered the release of the petitioner on bail.
Suresh Kait, J.
1. The instant petition is being filed for direction for release of the petitioner on bail in case FIR No. 82/2005 under Sections 49, 49B(1) of Wildlife Protection Act 1972, registered at P.S. Kamla Market and subsequent second FIR on the same facts and same provision of law, being RC SIB 2005 E 0003 dated 30.05.2005 under Sections 49, 49B(1) of the Wild Life Protection Act, 1972.
2. Mr. Siddarth Luthra, Sr. Advocate appearing for the petitioner has submitted that on 31.01.2005 FIR No. 82/2005 was registered by the officials of P.S. Kamla Market. Pursuant to the aforesaid FIR, on the same day, the petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has further submitted that on 01.02.2005 the investigation arising out of FIR No. 82/2005, was taken over by the officials of the Wild Life Department.
4. He further submitted that after completion of investigation of the matter the Inspector of Wild Life filed a criminal complaint bearing No. 572/2001 before the Learned ACMM, Delhi against eight persons wherein the petitioner was named as accused No. 1, alleging inter alia therein commission of offence under Sections 49, 49B(1) of the Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972. The learned ACMM, Delhi took cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 49, 49B(1) and summons were issued against all the accused persons vide its order dated 29.03.2005.
5. It is further submitted vide order dated 26.04.2005, the petitioner was ordered to be released on bail, as much as petitioner has already served the custody of nearly 90 days and the investigation of the case was completed.
6. On 25.05.2005 the Chief Wild Life Warden, Delhi vide letter dated 20.05.2005 informed the CBI that the investigation arising out of FIR No. 82/2005 has been completed, a complaint has been filed and the said complaint was sub judiced before the Court of learned ACMM and the consent was given to CBI for further action.
7. On 30.05.2005, the CBI registered second FIR bearing RC SIB 2005 E 0003 under Sections 49, 49B(1) of the Wild Life Protection Act, i.e. for commission of the same offence on the basis of the same allegations of the commission of same offence wherein P.S. Kamla Market had already registered FIR and complaint was filed after .the completion of the investigation.
8. It is further submitted on 16.08.2005 the petitioner, who was already on bail in the complaint case arising out of FIR No. 82/2005, was re-arrested by the CBI without cancellation of bail of the petitioner and in the absence of the permission of the competent court. On 17.08.2005 the CBI sought 15 days police remand of the petitioner from the court of Learned ACMM MCOCA was invoked against the petitioner but the Court of learned ACMM refused to grant police custody of the petitioner to the CBI, however, the petitioner was remanded to judicial custody since then he is in judicial custody.
9. On 10.07.2005, DIG of C.B.I., granted approval to invoke Section 3(1)(ii), 3(2) and 3(4) of MCOC Act, 1999.
10. On 22.08.2005, CBI filed Criminal Revision Petition No. 90/05 before the learned Additional Sessions Judge against the order of learned ACMM refusing to grant police custody to CBI.
11. Vide order dated 29.08.2005, the learned AST granted 10 days police custody of the petitioner to the CBI.
12. Being aggrieved against the aforesaid order on 03.09.2005 the petitioner filed a Criminal Revision Petition No. 661/2005 before this court which is pending for disposal.
13. He has submitted, the CBI had later filed a supplementary complaint on 23.12.2008 before the trial court against as many as five persons, namely the petitioner, Ritu, Babu, Badal and Sansar Chand for commission of offence under Section 120B IPC read with Section 51 of Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972 r/w Sections 3(1) (ii), 3(2), 3(4) of the MCOCA, 1999 (as extended to NCT of Delhi), in total contravention and ultra-virus the procedure as prescribed by law. Further the CBI fil
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
