सीआरपीसी की धारा 41ए का पालन किए बिना आरोपी को गिरफ्तार करने पर सुप्रीम कोर्ट ने पुलिस की खिंचाई की

याचिकाकर्ता की ओर से पेश अधिवक्ता सुनील फर्नांडीस ने प्रस्तुत किया कि जांच अधिकारी ने सीआरपीसी, 1973 की धारा 41 (ए) के तहत कोई नोटिस नहीं दिया।
उन्होंने आगे प्रस्तुत किया कि इस तथ्य को ध्यान में रखते हुए कि याचिकाकर्ता ने गिरफ्तारी से पहले सुप्रीम कोर्ट का दरवाजा खटखटाया है, जांच अधिकारी (आईओ) ने याचिकाकर्ता से संपर्क किया और उसे 8 मार्च, 2022 को हिरासत में ले लिया।
वकील के तर्क को ध्यान में रखते हुए और याचिकाकर्ता पहले से ही हिरासत में होने पर विचार करते हुए पीठ ने याचिकाकर्ता को नियमित जमानत आवेदन दायर करने की स्वतंत्रता दी।

पीठ ने अपने आदेश में कहा,

"यदि ऐसा कोई आवेदन दायर किया जाता है तो ट्रायल कोर्ट से यह अपेक्षा की जाती है कि वह सीआरपीसी की धारा 41 (ए) के गैर-अनुपालन पर ध्यान दे और याचिकाकर्ताओं द्वारा दायर गिरफ्तारी के बाद की जमानत के लिए आवेदन का जितनी जल्दी हो सके एक उचित समय में निपटारा करे।"

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Order 9 Rule 13 and Order 5 r/w Section 115 CPC

Image
_*:- Order 9 Rule 13 and Order 5 r/w Section 115 CPC   Setting aside ex-parte decree Plea of non-service of summons  Same found not supported by materials on the record Resultantly, impugned order declining prayer for setting aside ex-parte decree, held to be justified and declined to be interfered with in revision. [Paras 5 and 6]*_ Legallites Law Firm _*The Death Of Krishna Biswas, His Legal Heirs v/s  Keshab Chandra Dey CWP 530/12 [ Prasanta JJ ]*_ _*[ GAUHATI HIGH COURT ]*_ *______________________ Legallites Law Firm 8851250058 
Read more

Section 313 CRPC

Image
_*• Section 313 CRPC  Power to examine the accused Confession was not challenged during stage of framing of charge or over the course of examination of forty seven prosecution witnesses, but instead only partly disputed through a letter written in secret just before petitioner's examination under Section 313 of the Code. It is thus evident that such retraction at the fag-end of the trial, was not natural but rather meticulously formulated, perhaps as a part of defence strategy*_ Advocates _*Manoharan vs State RPCRL 446/19 07/11/19 [ SANJIV KHANNA JJ ]*_ _*[ SUPREME COURT ]*_ Advocate & solicitar 8851250058
Read more

Hindu Marriage Act Section 13B

Image
_- Hindu Marriage Act  Section 13B Divorce by mutual consent Maintenance Applicant for maintenance Applicant wife filed application for maintenance against husband After decree of mutual divorce obtained by husband In application endeavor was made by Applicant to demonstrate that said decree of divorce was obtained by fraud by giving assurance that marital bond would continue despite decree of divorce and it would remain paper decree There was inaction on part of Applicant for almost 9 years to agitate said grievance of decree Family Judge rightly came to conclusion that said claim of Applicant did not merit acceptance No material on record to indicate at any point of time till filing of Petition for award of maintenance Applicant had ever raised any grievance about decree of divorce having been obtained by fraud.[Para 11]*_ Legallites Law Firm _*Sanjay Damodar Kale v/s Ms.Kalyani Sanjay CRA 164/19 [ Jamadar JJ ]*_ _*[ SUPREME COURT ]*_ *__________________ Legallites ...
Read more