9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1226X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... er of grant of seven days police custody attained finality. However, due to the aforesaid reasons of having got the accused himself hospitalised on 18.04.2021 and thereafter obtaining the interim bail on 21.04.2021, the CBI could not interrogate the accused in the police custody though having a valid order in its favour. Thus, the respondent-accused has successfully avoided the full operation of the order of police custody granted by the learned Special Judge. No accused can be permitted to play with the investigation and/or the court s process. No accused can be permitted to frustrate the judicial process by his conduct. It cannot be disputed that the right of custodial interrogation/investigation is also a very important right in favour of the investigating agency to unearth the truth, which the accused has purposely and successfully tried to frustrate. Therefore, by not permitting the CBI to have the police custody interrogation for the remainder period of seven days, it will be giving a premium to an accused who has been successful in frustrating the judicial process. The appellant-CBI is permitted to have the police custody remand of the respondent for a period of four ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accused got admitted to the hospital and then again from 07.05.2022 to 08.09.2022. 2.2 That the accused submitted an application for default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. on the ground of non-filing of the charge sheet/report within the prescribed period of 90 days. The learned Special Judge rejected the said application inter alia on the ground that the accused was not remanded to custody under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. after cancellation of his bail on the grounds that the accused was granted interim bail under the provisions of Chapter XXXIII Cr.P.C. and his detention pursuant to cancellation of bail was on the strength of warrants issued by the Court. That on 19.07.2022, the CBI filed a charge sheet against the accused and the cognizance was taken by the learned Special Court on the same date. 2.3 Against the judgment and order passed by the learned Special Judge rejecting the application submitted by the accused Vikas Mishra for statutory/default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., the respondent-accused preferred the present application before the High Court. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court has allowed the said application and has directed to releas ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estigation v. Anupam J. Kulkarni, reported in (1992) 3 SCC 141 and the subsequent decision in the case of Budh Singh v. State of Punjab, reported in (2000) 9 SCC 266, it is vehemently submitted by Shri Neeraj Kishan Kaul, learned senior counsel appearing on behalf of the accused that as such no police custody can be granted/allowed beyond the first 15 days from the date of arrest. It is submitted that therefore now the police custody which shall be beyond the period of 15 days from the date of arrest is not permissible. 5.2 It is further submitted that even otherwise in the present case the respondent-accused was hospitalised from time to time due to his grave and fragile medical condition. That on 18.04.2021, the health of the respondent heavily deteriorated due to which he had to be admitted in the hospital by the appellant agency itself. It is submitted that thereafter on 20.04.2021 he was transferred to another hospital a government hospital for better treatment and medical facilities. It is submitted that therefore there is no substance in the submission on behalf of the investigating agency that on 18.04.2021 the accused got himself admitted to the hospital to evade his ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... reason for his hospitalisation. The learned Special Judge also observed that in view of the non-cooperation by the accused, the interrogation of the accused under judicial custody/police custody has necessitated. Some of the observations made by the learned Special Judge made in the order dated 08.12.2021 cancelling the interim bail are relevant, which are as under: Heard both sides, perused the materials in the CD and in the case record and considered. Following propositions were submitted and seems to be admitted that neither the accused person has attempted to tamper any evidence nor he is likely to flee from justice. The only aspect on which the present prayer under adjudication seems to be banked upon is that the accused person willfully halted the progress of the investigation by not cooperating the investigating agency during his attendances before them. For that I am here to decipher how genuine the allegation is and as to whether such alleged noncooperation on the part of this accused person is a sufficient ground to curb his bailed freedom and commit him back to custody invoking section 437(5) Cr. P.C. I have carefully gone through the transcribed conversations on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. But only that should not save him from the rigours of incarceration which he was supposed to be in, had the illness of that not there at the time of getting magnitude been not person the interim bail. There is nothing in the medical documents to assume that the accused is not fit enough to move, think or talk properly, as was urged by the Ld. Advocate for the accused person. In the contrary it is found that the accused person is suffering from cirrhosis of liver since before this case was initiated and there had been ups and downs in his health condition. For that this court cannot let the truth submerge in the plea of his chronic ailments. Coming to the medical reports submitted today it is found that today at 12.10 am he shifted himself to Apollo Hospital where he was examined and was readily admitted in some medically unspecified ward (Deluxe) under treatment of a specialist pulmonologist. Notable that the documents produced show that the emergency admission advice form has been struck down by hand making it a direct admission advice form and the bed number there is also illegible due to repeated overwriting. The admission form submitted shows that expected length of stay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... en days police custody attained finality. However, due to the aforesaid reasons of having got the accused himself hospitalised on 18.04.2021 and thereafter obtaining the interim bail on 21.04.2021, the CBI could not interrogate the accused in the police custody though having a valid order in its favour. Thus, the respondent-accused has successfully avoided the full operation of the order of police custody granted by the learned Special Judge. No accused can be permitted to play with the investigation and/or the court s process. No accused can be permitted to frustrate the judicial process by his conduct. It cannot be disputed that the right of custodial interrogation/investigation is also a very important right in favour of the investigating agency to unearth the truth, which the accused has purposely and successfully tried to frustrate. Therefore, by not permitting the CBI to have the police custody interrogation for the remainder period of seven days, it will be giving a premium to an accused who has been successful in frustrating the judicial process. 9. Now so far as the submission on behalf of the accused about the pendency of Special Leave Petition (Criminal) Nos. 1620-162 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
