Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Satish Vijay @ Bunty vs Intelligence Officer, Dri, Hyderabad on 20 January, 2014
Author: Chief Justice
Bench: Chief Justice
Ê"
ITEM NO.205 COURT NO.1 SECTION II
S U P R E M E C O U R T O F I N D I A
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl) No(s).9650/2013
(From the judgement and order dated 20/09/2013 in CRLP No.9168/2013
of The HIGH COURT OF A.P AT HYDERABAD)
SATISH VIJAY @ BUNTY Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
INTELLIGENCE OFFICER, DRI, HYDERABAD Respondent(s)
(With appln(s) for bail and office report)
(For final disposal)
WITH S.L.P.(Crl) NO.10124 of 2013
(With appln(s) for bail and office report)
(For final disposal)
Date: 20/01/2014 These Petitions were called on for hearing today.
CORAM :
HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJAN GOGOI
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.Y. EQBAL
For Petitioner(s) Mr. V. Giri, Sr. Adv.
Ms. Susha Unni, Adv.
Mr. Rishi Malhotra, AOR
SLP 10124/13 Mr. Uday U. Lalit, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Anil Lalla, Adv.
Mr. Shivaji M. Jadhav, AOR
Mr. B. Shravanth Shanker, Adv.
Mr. Satbir Pillania, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. P.P. Malhotra, ASG
Mr. Dinesh Kothari, Adv.
Ms. Padma Laxmi Nigam, Adv.
Mr. B. Krishna Prasad, AOR
UPON hearing counsel the Court made the following
O R D E R
Heard Mr. V. Giri, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in S.L.P.(Crl.) No.9650 of 2013, Mr. Uday U. Lalit, learned senior counsel for the petitioner in S.L.P.(Crl.) No.10124 of 2013 and Mr. P.P. Malhotra, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the respondent.
Initially, both the learned senior counsel by taking us through the relevant provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and placing reliance on a decision of this Court in State of Uttaranchal v. Rajesh Kumar Gupta [(2007) 1 SCC 355], contended that both the petitioners have to be released on bail. They also brought to our notice that among the accused involved in the case, A-1 and A-4 are before us and the other two accused, namely, A-2 and A-3 were granted bail by the High Court. It is further pointed out that A-1 was arrested on 30th January, 2013 and A-4 on 23rd February, 2013. In addition to the same, Mr. Uday U. Lalit, learned senior counsel appearing for A-4, also submitted that on the ground of serious illness, he may be considered for bail.
On the other hand, learned Additional Solicitor General, taking us through the relevant material, opposed the request of the petitioners.
On going through the relevant materials, we are not inclined to go into the merits of the claim as projected by both the senior counsel at this juncture. It is true that both the petitioners are in custody for nearly a period of one year.
Taking note of all the materials placed, we direct the Special Court to make all endeavour for early completion of the trial, preferably within a period of four months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. For any reason, if the Special Judge is not in a position to complete the trial and not at the instance of the delaying tactics of the present petitioners, they are free to move fresh application for bail and in that event, the court concerned is free to pass appropriate order on merits. The petitioners are directed to co-operate with the Special Court for early completion of trial, as directed above.
With the above observation, both the special leave petitions are disposed of.
|(Chetan Kumar) | |(Savita Sainani) | |Court Master | |Assistant Registrar |