TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Join Channel
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether orders extending remand under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure required recorded reasons and whether house arrest should be directed to facilitate defence. (ii) Whether the petitioner was entitled to statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that the complaints were filed on an incomplete investigation.
Issue (i): Whether orders extending remand under Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure required recorded reasons and whether house arrest should be directed to facilitate defence.
Analysis: Section 309 governs the expeditious conduct of inquiry or trial and remand during adjournments. The provision was held not to require reasons to be recorded every time remand is extended after filing of the complaints. Any grievance based on prolonged custody and the right to speedy trial was held to be a matter for consideration in a regular bail application, subject to the statutory conditions under the special enactment. The request for house arrest was also rejected because no extraordinary circumstances were shown, though access to relied upon documents was directed to be ensured.
Conclusion: The challenge to the remand-extension orders failed and the request for house arrest was rejected.
Issue (ii): Whether the petitioner was entitled to statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that the complaints were filed on an incomplete investigation.
Analysis: The complaints were held not to be incomplete merely because further investigation was stated to be continuing to identify additional proceeds of crime. A distinction was drawn between an incomplete report and a complete complaint accompanied by a proposal for further investigation. Since the complaint and materials already filed were sufficient for the trial to proceed, the Court held that the investigation could not be treated as incomplete for the purpose of statutory bail.
Conclusion: The claim for statutory bail was rejected.
Final Conclusion: The revisions did not disclose any ground for interference, and the trial court was also directed to complete the trial within the stipulated period.
Ratio Decidendi: A complaint is not rendered incomplete for purposes of statutory bail merely because further investigation is stated to be continuing, and Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not require recorded reasons for every remand-extension order after filing of the complaint.
TaxTMI 
