9911796707
TMI Blog1999 (4) TMI 623X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppellant was arrested in connection with a case involving Section 15 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (For short the 'NDPS Act) registered by the police of Kota in Rajasthan (it can be referred to as "the Rajasthan case", for convenience) and is remaining in custody. In the meanwhile, another case under NDPS Act started snowballing at rampura district in Madhya Pradesh which initially was against one Govind Singh and eventually it involved the appellant also (for convenience the latter case can be referred to as "the MP case"). It is said that appellant was recorded as arrested in connection with the MP case on 7.8.1998. Appellant moved for bail in Rajasthan case and after initial setbacks ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... adhya Pradesh who passed the impugned order, was not inclined to give the appellant benefit of the proviso to Section 167(2) of the Code on the premise that he was not produced before any Court pursuant to the arrest dated 7.8.1998 and hence he cannot be treated to be in judicial custody in the MP case. This is what the learned judge has said: "On perusal off the impugned order of the trial court, it emerged that the accused/applicant is not produced before the Court as yet in compliance to the production warrant issued by the Court. The trial Court considered that he is not in a judicial custody in the instant case. Without commenting anything on the applicability of Section 187(2) to this case at this stage I do not consider it pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvestigation relates to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years". The proviso further mandates that "on the expiry of the said period of ninety days...... the accused person shall be released on bail if he is prepared to and does furnish bail." It is further provided that "every person released on bail under this sub-section shall be deemed to be so released under the provisions of Chapter XXXIII for the purposes of that Chapter." Here the prayer for bail is opposed on the ground that detention is without such authorisation. Can the benefit of bail be denied on such a ground? Section 167(1) of the Code is relevant in this context as it enjoins on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ntext Section 57 of the Code is also relevant and hence it is extracted below : "57. Person arrested not to be detained more than twenty-four hours. - No police arrested without warrant for a longer period than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the absence of a special order of a Magistrate under section 167, exceed twenty-four hours exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place off arrest to the Magistrate's Court." If the police officer is forbidden from keeping an arrested person beyond twenty four hours without order of a magistrate, what should happen to the arrested person after the said period. It is a constitutional mandate that no person shall be de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
