Supreme Court - Daily Orders
Rajesh Nayak vs The State By Vitla Police Bantwal Taluk on 5 January, 2018
Bench: Rohinton Fali Nariman, Navin Sinha
1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 20 OF 2018
[@ SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRL.) NOS. 9140 OF 2017]
RAJESH NAYAK & ORS. Appellant(s)
VERSUS
THE STATE BY VITLA POLICE BANTWAL TALUK Respondent(s)
O R D E R
1. Leave granted.
2. The sole question that arises under the present case is as to the applicability of Section 22(5) of the Karnataka Control of Organised Crime Act (in short, “the Act”). The said Section reads as under :-
“Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, the accused shall not be granted bail if it is noticed by the Court that he was on bail in an offence under this Act or under any other Act on the date of the offence in question.”
3. Applying the aforesaid provision, the High Court denied bail to the appellants on the sole ground that they were already granted bail for other offences. Signature Not Verified
4. This Court in State of Maharashtra Vs. Bharat Shanti Digitally signed by JAYANT KUMAR ARORA Date: 2018.01.05 16:20:23 IST Reason: Lal Shah and others, reported in (2008) 13 SCC 5, at Page No. 29, struck down a pari materia provision, which is in 2 identical terms, under the Maharashtra Control of Organised Crime Act (MCOCA). It was held by this Court that the expression “or under any other Act” was unconstitutional.
5. This being the case, we have to proceed on the footing that the same expression contained in Section 22(5) does not exist. This being the case and it being clear that the appellants were granted bail under IPC or Arms Act offences, Section 22(5) of the Act would not come in the way of granting bail. The appellants are, therefore, entitled to be released on bail forthwith, subject to the conditions already set out. Ordered accordingly. The impugned Judgment is set aside and the appeal is allowed.
.........................J. (Rohinton Fali Nariman) .........................J. (Navin Sinha) New Delhi;
January 05, 2018.
3
OUT TODAY
ITEM NO.45 COURT NO.11 SECTION II-C
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). 9140/2017
(Arising out of impugned final judgment and order dated 17-10-2017 in CRLRP No. 949/2017 passed by the High Court Of Karnataka At Bangalore) RAJESH NAYAK & ORS. Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE BY VITLA POLICE BANTWAL TALUK Respondent(s) (FOR ADMISSION and I.R. and IA No.125277/2017-EXEMPTION FROM FILING O.T. and IA No.127524/2017-IA FOR PLACING ON RECORD SUBSEQUENT EVENTS.) Date : 05-01-2018 This petition was called on for hearing today. CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ROHINTON FALI NARIMAN HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAVIN SINHA For Petitioner(s) Mr. Basava Prabhu S. Patil, Sr. Adv.
Mr. Shailesh Madiyal, AOR Mr. Chinmay Deshpandey, Adv.
Mr. Aryan Shyam, Adv.
Mr. Sudhanshu Prakash, Adv.
For Respondent(s) Mr. Joseph Aristotle S., AOR Ms. Priya Aristotle, Adv.
Mr. Ashish Yadav, Adv.
UPON hearing the counsel the Court made the following O R D E R Leave granted.
The appeal is allowed in terms of the signed order. Pending Interlocutory Applications, if any, stand disposed of.
(JAYANT KUMAR ARORA) (SAROJ KUMARI GAUR) COURT MASTER COURT MASTER
(Signed order is placed on the file)