Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2000 (9) TMI 1091

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... PS Case No. 628/98 under Sections 366A/376/34 of the Indian Penal Code (in short, IPC) was registered on the basis of Fardbeyan of informant Reena Kumari aged about 14 years. In the Fardbeyan the informant alleged that on 30-9-98 at about 11 p.m. when she along with her parents was returning to her house after visiting Dashahara fair, a red Maruti car in the way stopped near her. The occupants of the car after opening its gate forcibly dragged her from road in the car. Her mother tried to rescue her but could not as the car moved with speed. Two occupants sitting on the back seat of the car tied the mouth of informant with her 'Odhani' and when she tried to raise alarm they threatened her that in case she raised alarm she would be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... habeas corpus only on the ground that the detention of petitioners in custody is illegal because after commitment of case to the Court of Session they are not being produced before the Court from jail custody. 3. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners has submitted that after commitment of a case to the Court of Session an accused is required to be produced after every fifteen days under Section 309, Cr.P.C. before the Court of Session and because the petitioners after their case was committed to the Court of Session were not produced as such before the Court of Session, their detention in jail custody is illegal and the petitioners are entitled to be released from the jail custody. I am unable to accept this submission. .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ese provisions are applicable in every inquiry or trial either before a Magistrate or a Court of Session. Admittedly, the case of petitioners has been committed to the Court of Session under the provisions of Section 209, Cr.P.C. which provides that if it appears to a Magistrate that the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of Session, he shall commit the case to the Court of Session after complying with the provisions of Section 207 or Section 208, as the case may be, and Sub-section (b) of this section provides that subject to the provisions of this Code relating to bail, remand the accused to custody during, and until the conclusion of, the trial . The provisions of Section 209, Cr.P.C. make it clear that when a Magistrate comm .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ons to be recorded. When an accused at the time of commitment of a case to Court of Session is remanded to jail custody by a Magistrate under Section 209(b) that remand prescribes the limit of detention of accused in custody which is during and until the conclusion of trial. The word trial appearing in this section undoubtedly means trial before the Court of Session. In such situation no fresh remand by the Court of Session prescribing the limit of detention of accused in custody is at all required. By no stretch of imagination it can be held that the order of a Magistrate passed under Section 209(b), Cr.P.C. remanding an accused to jail custody during and until conclusion of trial will come to an end when accused is produced before the C .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... etitioners in this regard. 6. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that charges in this case have already been framed on 26-6-2000 and the case is now pending for recording evidence of prosecution witnesses. The petitioners in their supplementary affidavit have admitted that charges have been framed on 26-6-2000 when they were produced in Court but according to them, it has been done so by order of this Court passed in Cr. Misc. No. 4260 of 2000. It is not the case of petitioners that charges have been framed against them without their production in Court or any prosecution witness has been examined in their absence. 7. It is true that Annexure-3 which is a report of the Court below which was called for by this Court in Cr. Mis .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates