Research › Search › Judgment

Madhya Pradesh High Court · body

2003 DIGILAW 1288 (MP)

Kok Singh v. State of M. P.

2003-11-25

S.L.KOCHAR

body2003
Judgment ( 1. ) THE applicant is seeking bail under Section 167 (2), Cr. PC. ( 2. ) ACCORDING to the applicant, he was formally arrested on 26-6-2003 as per order passed by CJM, Ujjain because on that date he was produced in Crime No. 346/2003 under Section 25 of Arms Act. Thereafter, he was produced before the Court concerned, i. e. , Magistrate, Dewas on 1-7-2003. Whereas charge-sheet has been filed on 27-9-2003. ( 3. ) THE contention of the learned Counsel for the applicant is that computation of 90 days was started from 26-6-2003 and therefore, since the charge-sheet has not been filed within 90 days, he is entitled to be released on bail prior to filing of charge-sheet. ( 4. ) THE contention of the Counsel appearing for the State is that Crime No. 598/2002 for the offence under Sections 395, 397, IPC was registered by Police Station, BNP, Dewas and learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class is having jurisdiction over the matter. On 27-6-2003, an application was filed by the Police, Dewas Court for issuance of production warrant to produce the applicant before the said Court from Bherugarh Jail and in pursuance thereof, the applicant was produced on 1-7-2003. The computation of 90 days will, therefore, commenced from 1-7-2003, whereas the charge-sheet was filed on 27-9-2003 much before completion of 90 days. ( 5. ) MR. Desai, learned Dy. Advocate General has placed reliance on a judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation, Special Investigation Cell-I, New Delhi v. Anupam J. Kulkarni, Relevant discussion, as discussed in Para 11 of the aforesaid judgment is as follows :- "however, we must clarity that this limitation shall not apply to a different occurrence in which complicity of the arrested accused is disclosed. That would be a different transaction and if an accused is in judicial custody in connection with one case and to enable the police to complete their investigation of the other case they can require his detention in police custody for the purpose of associating him with the investigation of the other case. In such a situation he must be formally arrested in connection with other case and then obtain the order of the Magistrate for detention in police custody. " ( 6. In such a situation he must be formally arrested in connection with other case and then obtain the order of the Magistrate for detention in police custody. " ( 6. ) IN the present case formal arrest of the applicant was done by order dated 26-6-2003, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ujjain but the applicant was not taken in police custody but thereafter, on 27-6-2003, police has filed the application to produce the applicant before Dewas Court having jurisdiction over the matter and in pursuance thereof, he was produced on 1-7-2003. From 26-6-2003 to 1-7-2003 he was not in police custody. His police custody was sought by filing an application on 1-7-2003 and the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Dewas granted police custody for the purpose of interrogation and investigation upto 5-7-2003. ( 7. ) IN this view of the matter, the first remand in this case has been granted by the concerned Court on 1-7-2003 and the charge-sheet was filed on 27-9-2003 within 90 days. ( 8. ) SINCE the charge-sheet was filed within 90 days as discussed above, the applicant is not entitled to be released on bail under Section 167 (2), Cr. PC. ( 9. ) THUS, the application is, accordingly, dismissed. C. C. in 7 days.