TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (6) TMI 1818
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t that the accused person was arrested and is lodging in custody in connection with this case on and from 07.05.2024 and the statutory period of his detention was expired on 02.11.2024. But within time the I.O. could not submit any charge-sheet justifying his further detention in custody and as such the accused person is entitled to get default bail in connection with this case. Learned Counsel further referring the order dated 02.11.2024 passed by Learned Trial Court submitted that on that day the I.O. could not place any charge-sheet against the accused person before the jurisdictional Court and the plea was taken before the Learned Special Judge, Unakoti District, Kailashahar that the accused person was lodging in custody for more than 180 days. But the Learned Special Judge did not consider his plea and by the said order dated 02.11.2024 the Learned Special Judge further extended the period of his detention in custody beyond the statutory period. Learned Counsel further drawn the attention of this Court referring the order dated 04.11.2024 wherein the Learned Special Judge observed that on 02.11.2024 no charge-sheet was placed before the Learned Court below though the charge-sh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....this stage is as to whether the two applications for extension that had been filed by the Public Prosecutor seeking an extension beyond 180 days met the necessary conditions. We find that the matter need not detain us as it is no longer res integra and is completely covered by the judgment of this Court in Hitendra Vishnu case [(1994) 4 SCC 602 : 1994 SCC (Cri) 1087] . In this case, the Bench was dealing with the proviso inserted as clause (bb) in sub-section (4) of Section 20 of TADA, which is in pari materia with the proviso to sub-section (4) of Section 36-A of the Act. This Court accepted the argument of the accused that an extension beyond 180 days could be granted but laid a rider that it could be so after certain conditions were satisfied." In Pankaj Bansal vs. Union of India & Ors., reported in (2024) 7 SCC 576 in para Nos.38 and 45, Hon'ble the Apex Court observed as under: "38. In this regard, we may note that Article 22(1) of the Constitution provides, inter alia, that no person who is arrested shall be detained in custody without being informed, as soon as may be, of the grounds for such arrest. This being the fundamental right guaranteed to the arrested per....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o disputed by the appellants. As this form of communication is not found to be adequate to fulfil compliance with the mandate of Article 22(1) of the Constitution and Section 19(1) PMLA, we have no hesitation in holding that their arrest was not in keeping with the provisions of Section 19(1) PMLA. Further, as already noted supra, the clandestine conduct of ED in proceeding against the appellants, by recording the second ECIR immediately after they secured interim protection in relation to the first ECIR, does not commend acceptance as it reeks of arbitrary exercise of power. In effect, the arrest of the appellants and, in consequence, their remand to the custody of ED and, thereafter, to judicial custody, cannot be sustained." Again, in Prabir Purkayastha vs. State(NCT of Delhi) reported in (2024) 8 SCC 254 in para Nos.28, 29, 30 and 37, Hon'ble the Apex Court observed thus: "28. The language used in Article 22(1) and Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India regarding the communication of the grounds is exactly the identical. Neither of the constitutional provisions require that the "grounds" of "arrest" or "detention", as the case may be, must be communicated in wri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to the police officer. (e) As unless such person is arrested, his presence in the court whenever required cannot be ensured." In addition to the aforementioned citations, Learned Counsel for the accused in custody also referred to some other citations of Hon'ble The Gauhati High Court, High Court of Orissa etc. On the other hand, Learned P.P., Mr. Datta appearing on behalf of the State-respondent strongly opposed the submissions made by Learned Counsel for the accused in custody and submitted that the accused person was taken into custody in connection with this case on 07.05.2024 and accordingly his statutory period of detention was expired on 02.11.2024 but the I.O. laid charge-sheet against him on 30.09.2024 although the same was not placed before the Learned Court below on the same day. But from the order dated 04.11.2024 it is crystal clear that for want of signature of the I.O. on the fly-leaf of the docket on 21.10.2024 the same could not be placed before the concerned Court below. Learned P.P. further submitted that considering the materials on record at ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nt along with the staff pursued the vehicle and conducted search and during search it was seen that except the driver seat as well as co-passenger front seat there were no seats in the vehicle and some suspicious articles were found covered by a white cloth. On removing the cloth they found some brown colored plastic wrapped bundles lying all over the vehicle. On further query it was found that those bundles were of Cannabis (Ganja) packed and wrapped tightly with brown colored plastic cello tape. He immediately informed the matter to O/C PS as well as SDPO who immediately rushed to the spot. Thereafter, Inspector L. Darlong, I/C Kailashahar PS along with SI, Debabrata Shil arrived the spot carrying electronic weighing machine, drug detection kit etc. and after search they recovered 53 Nos. bundles of Cannabis packed and wrapped with brown colored plastic cello tape. Subsequently, after taking weight it was found that in total 386 kgs 86 gms of Cannabis were found. Accordingly, he seized the recovered Cannabis along with the vehicle bearing registration No. TR01-C-4314(White colored Bolero Ambulance) and 3 numbers of fake number plates bearing No.TR01-C-4313, TR05-B-3525(02 Nos.). ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....re were non-application of mind by those persons who were entrusted with the duties of handling prosecution papers and due to such fault the right of a person cannot be curtailed. The statutory period of detention of the accused person was expired on 02.11.2024. Since no charge-sheet was placed before the Court either on that day or on the following day so the accused person was entitled to be released on bail. As already stated, the trial has already been commenced and by this time prosecution has adduced 6 Nos. of witnesses. The prosecution is to adduce more 4 or 5 Nos. of witnesses in this case. Whether the accused is innocent or guilty that can be ascertained only after conclusion of trial at the time of delivery of judgment by the concerned Learned Special Judge. However, due to the aforesaid technical reasons the right of the accused person cannot be curtailed and as such, the present accused is entitled to be released on bail. Accordingly, the application for granting bail to the accused in custody is hereby allowed. The accused namely, Iman Hossain may be released on bail of his furnishing bail bond of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety of like amount who must be a public ser....