Advertisements

FACTS OF THE CASE

The petitioner, Nijamuddin Mohammad Bashir Khan, was arrested on May 17, 2006, for the alleged murder of his wife. He was subsequently remanded to police custody by a Magistrate. After the expiry of the police custody period, he was produced before the Magistrate again and was remanded to judicial custody. The Magistrate had granted an order for Khan’s detention for 15 days under Section 167(2) of the CrPC.

Khan filed an application for bail contending that his detention had exceeded the statutory limit of 15 days under Section 167(2) of the CrPC. The trial court rejected his application, and then he approached to the High Court of Bombay.

ARGUMENTS OF THE PETITIONER

In the case of Nijamuddin Mohammad Bashir Khan v/s State of Maharashtra, the petitioner, Nijamuddin Mohammad Bashir Khan, had filed a bail application under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, seeking release on bail after being in custody for more than 90 days in connection with a criminal case. The case involved allegations of extortion and criminal intimidation against the petitioner.

ARGUMENTS OF THE RESPONDENT

The respondent, the State of Maharashtra, argued that the period of detention should be calculated from the date of the petitioner’s first remand to police custody. The respondent contended that the period of detention did not exceed the statutory limit of 15 days, as the detention order was granted by the Magistrate within 24 hours of the petitioner’s arrest, as required under Section 167(2)(a)(i) of the CrPC. The respondent further contended that the petitioner’s detention was justified under Section 167(2)(a)(ii) of the CrPC, as the investigation in the case was still on going.

JUDGMENT

The bail application was heard by a division bench of the High Court of Bombay, comprising of Justice J. N. Patel and Justice Smt. Roshan S. Dalvi. The bench observed that the investigating agency had not been able to produce sufficient evidence against the petitioner to justify his continued detention beyond the statutory period of 90 days under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The petitioner argued that there was no prima facie evidence against him and that the allegations against him were baseless. He also contended that his continued detention was not justified under the law and that he should be granted bail.

The respondent, the State of Maharashtra, opposed the bail application and argued that the petitioner was a habitual offender and a threat to society. The respondent further contended that the petitioner was likely to tamper with the evidence and influence the witnesses if he was released on bail.

After considering the arguments of both parties and examining the material on record, the court held that the investigating agency had not produced sufficient evidence to justify the continued detention of the petitioner beyond the statutory period of 90 days under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

The court also observed that the allegations against the petitioner were general in nature and lacked specific details. Further, there was no material on record to suggest that the petitioner was likely to tamper with the evidence or influence the witnesses if he was released on bail.

Accordingly, the court granted bail to the petitioner subject to certain conditions, including the furnishing of a personal bond and surety, and directed him to cooperate with the investigating agency and not to leave the jurisdiction of the court without its permission.

So, the judgment in the case of Nijamuddin Mohammad Bashir Khan v/s State of Maharashtra established that continued detention of an accused beyond the statutory period of 90 days under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, without sufficient evidence to justify it, is not permissible under the law.

The judgment also emphasized that the grant of bail is not automatic and must be based on the specific facts and circumstances of each case.

CONCLUSION

The High Court of Bombay granted bail to the petitioner, Nijamuddin Mohammad Bashir Khan, after considering the facts and arguments presented by both the petitioner and the respondent, the State of Maharashtra. The court held that the investigating agency had not produced sufficient evidence to justify the continued detention of the petitioner beyond the statutory period of 90 days under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Therefore, the court concluded that the petitioner was entitled to be released on bail.

written by Shipra Vidyarthi intern under legal vidhiya

Admin