1993 (3) TMI 385 - HC - Indian Laws

Court orders surrender before Sessions Judge, quashes Sections 82 & 83 process, transfers case for bail.

Devendra Singh Negi Versus State of U.P. and Ors.

Devendra Singh Negi Versus State of U.P. and Ors. - TMI Issues Involved:1. Modification of previous court order regarding surrender and bail application.2. Alleged mala fide actions by the police and lethargic handling of bail matters.3. Non-compliance with mandatory provisions of Sections 82 and 83 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).4. Improper handling of surrender applications by subordinate magistrates.5. Contempt of court proceedings against the Chief Judicial Magistrate (C.J.M.).6. Transfer of the case to a neighboring district due to alleged bias.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Modification of Previous Court Order Regarding Surrender and Bail Application:The applicant filed an application on 8-1-1993 for modification of the order dated 30-9-1992, seeking direction for the Chief Judicial Magistrate (C.J.M.) to consider his surrender and bail application without delay. The court had previously directed that if the applicant surrendered and applied for bail, the application should be considered the same day, and if adjourned, the applicant should be released on a personal bond until the adjourned date. Despite this, the applicant was not taken into custody when he attempted to surrender, and the C.J.M. deferred the matter, which led to the current application.2. Alleged Mala Fide Actions by the Police and Lethargic Handling of Bail Matters:The applicant alleged that the police were trying to arrest him based on inadmissible confessions by co-accused and that there was no substantial evidence against him. He also claimed that bail matters were being handled lethargically in Tehri Garhwal. The court noted that the C.J.M. did not take the applicant into custody despite the applicant being proclaimed as an absconder, which was seen as an attempt to circumvent the court's order.3. Non-Compliance with Mandatory Provisions of Sections 82 and 83 of the Cr.P.C.:The court found that the process for attachment of the applicant's property was issued in a surreptitious manner. The orders under Sections 82 and 83 were not preserved on the record, and the C.J.M. could not provide details about who passed these orders and when. The court emphasized that the attachment of property should not be done hastily or without proper application of mind, as it brings serious consequences and public ridicule to the person whose property is attached.4. Improper Handling of Surrender Applications by Subordinate Magistrates:The court strongly disapproved of the practice where subordinate magistrates did not permit an accused to surrender immediately and instead asked for a report from the Public Prosecutor. The court stated that when an accused surrenders and makes an application stating they are wanted in a crime, their prayer should be accepted, and the surrender application should not be postponed.5. Contempt of Court Proceedings Against the C.J.M.:The court issued a notice to the C.J.M. to show cause why contempt proceedings should not be initiated for attempting to circumvent the court's order. However, considering the apology submitted by the C.J.M., the court decided not to proceed with contempt charges. The court noted that the C.J.M. should have accepted the applicant's surrender, especially since he had been proclaimed as an absconder.6. Transfer of the Case to a Neighboring District Due to Alleged Bias:The applicant argued that the atmosphere in Tehri Garhwal was biased against him, especially after the court issued a notice to the C.J.M. based on his application. The court agreed that the applicant had not been given a fair deal and might reasonably apprehend that he would not receive justice in the current environment. The court decided to transfer the case to a neighboring district for the speedy disposal of the bail application.Final Directions:(a) The applicant may surrender before the Sessions Judge, Dehradun within one month. If he surrenders and applies for bail, the Sessions Judge shall dispose of the bail application as directed by the order dated 30-9-1992.(b) The process issued under Sections 82 and 83, Cr.P.C. against the applicant is quashed, and the property shall be released forthwith.(c) The notice issued to the C.J.M. for initiating contempt proceedings is vacated.(d) The stay order dated 13-1-1993 shall continue for one month to enable the applicant to surrender.(e) The Registrar shall send a copy of this order to all Chief Judicial Magistrates within one week for guidance in taking action under Sections 82 and 83 of the Code.(f) The applicant shall be supplied a copy of this order within three days.