9911796707
TMI Blog1982 (12) TMI 228X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 5 A.M. against five persons including the applicant Sunder Lal. The Investigating Officer after completing the investigation submitted charge-sheet. The learned Judicial Magistrate by his order dated 8-3-1982 committed the applicant along with others to the Sessions Judge, Luck-now for trial under Sections 147/148/302/307 of the I.P.C. as these offences were exclusively triable by the Sessions Judge. It may be mentioned that the applicant was in jail at the time the case was committed to the Court of Session. He also mentioned that his order be notified to the Public Prosecutor, Lucknow. In the order it was also mentioned that the custody of Sunder Lal, who was in Jail, be handed over to the Superintendent, District Jail, during and till the disposal of the case before the Sessions Judge where he would be produced by the Superintendent, District Jail, as and when ordered. 3. In pursuance of this commitment order a custody warrant was issued. This warrant was summoned by us. The English translation of it reads as under.- Warrant - Intermediary custody under Section 309, Cr. P.C., 1973. Jailor, Lucknow. Whereas Sunder Lal son of Nand Lal resident of Gendan Khera, hamlet o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ibed relating to the case, and shall at the same time forward the accused to such Magistrate. (2) The Magistrate to whom an accused person is forwarded under this section may, whether he has or has not jurisdiction to try the case, from time to time, authorise the detention of the accused in such custody as such Magistrate thinks fit, for a term not exceeding fifteen days in the whole; and if he has no jurisdiction to try the case or commit it-for trial, and considers further detention unnecessary, he may order the accused to be forwarded to a Magistrate having such jurisdiction. 7. The amended Clause (a) to Sub-section (2) reads: (a) The Magistrate may authorise the detention of the accused person, otherwise than in the custody of the police, beyond the period of fifteen days, if he is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for doing so but no Magistrate shall authorise the detention of the accused person in custody under this paragraph for a total period exceeding (i) ninety days, where the investigation relates to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years; (ii) sixty days, where the investigation r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his Code relating to bail, remand the accused to custody during and until the conclusion of the trial; (c) send to that court the record of the case and the documents and articles, if any, which are to be produced in evidence; (d) notify the Public Prosecutor of the commitment of the case to the Court of Session. 12. Section 209 Cr. P.C. has been introduced by the new Code of Criminal Procedure and it provides for commitment of a case which is exclusively triable by a Court of Session. The wordings of this section are very relevant. The words subject to the provisions of this Code relating to bail refer to Sections 436, 437, 438 and 439 of the Code which contain provisions relating to bail. The power of the committing Magistrate to cancel the bail of an accused who has been bailed out by him and to remand him to custody during and until the conclusion of the trial, is subject to the provisions contained in Section 437(5) of the Code, hence the committing Magistrate who has admitted the accused to bail under Section 437(1) or (2) may cancel his bail and commit him to custody if he considers it necessary to do so. The Magistrate, however, should exercise his discretion in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nviction, secondly to provide that no person shall be committed for trial without being acquainted with the facts and circumstances of the offence impugned against him and without being given a fair opportunity of meeting them. The statutory requirement of a separate order in writing with reasons therefore, is only in respect of commitment and not in respect of remanding the accused to jail custody for which mere issue of warrant of remand is sufficient. It has been conceded before us that no specific form of warrant has been prescribed under Section 209, Cr. P.C., while remanding the accused to judicial custody at the time of commitment of the case. This section vests the Magistrate with a power to authorise the detention of an accused in jail custody during and until the conclusion of the trial while committing him to stand his trial before the Sessions Court. In such a case even though all further proceedings are to take place before the Court of Session and no proceedings are to take place before the Magistrate the detention of the accused in jail custody can be authorised by the Magistrate who commits the accused to sessions, in the instant case that Magistrate while passing t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the applicant on 17-9-1982. It, there-fore, transpires that the Sessions Court has been issuing orders for the custody of the applicant to jail and fixing date for his appearance before the Court in connection with the trial of the applicant. The argument of the learned Counsel for the applicant is (sic) arbitrary and for indefinite period, therefore falls to ground. It further transpires from the record that on 13-9-1982 the applicant had been admitted to a short term bail for a period of three months. The applicant is, therefore, no longer in the custody of jail and it is evident that prior to this being granted short term bail he was kept in judicial custody in the District Jail under orders of the Sessions Judge passed from time to time and was required to appear to face his trial. The detention order was neither arbitrary nor suffered from any manifest illegality warranting interference by this Court. 14. The learned Counsel for the applicant conceded that the law declared in Rajendra Gosain v. Supdt., District Jail, Banda (supra) was not applicable to this case. It is, therefore, not necessary for us to examine the questions mentioned in the referring order by the learn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
