You must have to
Register with us for Viewing the FULL JUDGMENT.
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973
Sections 41A & 41(1)(b)(ii)—Arrest—Legality of—Plea regarding non-compliance of the provisions—Rejected—Appellant’s arrest does not suffer from any procedural infirmity. [Hon’ble Justice Surya Kant]
[Para 36]
Sections 41A & 41(1)(b)(ii)—Arrest of appellant by the CBI—Necessity and timing—Power to arrest is one thing but the need to arrest is altogether a different thing—Just because an investigating agency has the power to arrest, it does not necessarily mean that it should arrest such a person—When the CBI did not feel the necessity to arrest the appellant for 22 long months, the timing of arrest of the appellant by the CBI is quite suspect—Investigation must not only be fair but must be seem to be so—Belated arrest of appellant by the CBI is unjustified and the continued incarceration of the appellant in the CBI case that followed such arrest has become untenable—Appellant is directed to be released on bail in connection with FIR registered by the CBI. [Hon’ble Justice Ujjal Bhuyan]
[Paras 27, 31, 39 & 41]
Section 439—Regular bail—Question as to whether the filing of charge-sheet is a change in circumstances warranting relegation to the trial court for grant of regular bail—Bail being closely tied to personal liberty, such claims should be adjudicated promptly on their merits, rather than oscillating between courts on mere procedural technicalities—Since notice was issued and the parties were apparently heard on merits by the High Court, the Apex Court do not deem it necessary at this stage to relegate the appellant to the trial court even though filing of a charge-sheet is a change in the circumstances. [Hon’ble Justice Surya Kant]
[Paras 43 to 46]
Section 439—Denial of regular bail—Appeal—Appellant is a public representative and has been elected thrice the Chief Minister of the Government of NCT of Delhi—CBI – the respondent registered an FIR under Section 120B read with Section 477A of IPC and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act against various persons—Name of appellant did not figure in the FIR—Although the procedure for the appellant’s arrest meets the requisite criteria for legality and compliance, continued incarceration for an extended period pending trial would infringe upon established legal principles and the appellant’s right to liberty—Appellant has been granted interim bail twice by the Apex Court in the ED matter on the same set of facts—Several co-accused in both the CBI and ED matters have also been granted bail by the trial court, the High Court, and the Apex Court in separate proceedings—Appellant satisfies the requisite triple conditions for the grant of bail—Appellant is directed to be released on bail in connection with FIR registered by the CBI. [Hon’ble Justice Surya Kant]
[Paras 29, 35, 36, 40 & 47]