Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: section 436 in Sharjeel Imam vs State Of Nct Delhi on 26 September, 2022Matching Fragments
It is further urged by the learned counsel for the petitioner that Section 124-A IPC cannot be taken into consideration, in view of the observations of the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the only offence which remains to be considered is the adjudication with reference to Section 153-A IPC, which is punishable with three years of imprisonment.
It is informed that the petitioner has already preferred an application under Section 436-A Cr.P.C. with reference to Section 153-A IPC, which is pending consideration before the learned ASJ-05, South-East District, Saket Court, New Delhi, since the applicant/petitioner was arrested on 17.02.2020 and has already undergone imprisonment for approximately 31 months and is entitled for consideration of bail under Section 436-A Cr.P.C.. Reliance is further placed upon the judgment dated 11.07.2022 passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr, Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.5191/2021. It is further prayed on behalf of the petitioner that an order may be passed by this Court, clarifying that the pendency of the present bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. before this Court will not come in the way, while deciding the application under Section 436-A Cr.P.C. before the learned ASJ-05, South-East District, Saket Courts, Delhi.
First proviso to Section 436-A Cr.P.C. further provides that the Court may, after hearing the Public Prosecutor and for reasons to be recorded by it in writing, order the continued detention of such person for a period longer than one-half of the said period or release him on bail instead of the personal bond with or without sureties.
Further, second proviso to Section 436-A Cr.P.C. provides that no such person shall in any case be detained during the period of investigation inquiry or trial for more than the maximum period of imprisonment provided for the said offence under that law.
However, the first proviso to Section 436-A Cr.P.C. permits the continued detention of said person for a period longer than one-half of the said period, if such detention is necessary for the reasons to be recorded in writing. Such an exercise of power is expected to be undertaken sparingly being an exception to the general rule. It also needs to be kept in perspective that Section 436-A Cr.P.C. facilitates liberty being the core intendment under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, as observed in Satender Kumar Antil Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. (supra).
f. The above directions may continue till further orders are passed..."
In the facts and circumstances, I am further of the considered opinion that it is of paramount consideration that the learned Trial Court considers the application for bail already preferred on behalf of the petitioner under Section 436-A Cr.P.C, also with reference to Section 124-A IPC keeping in perspective the directions issued by the Hon'ble Supreme Court under Section 124-A IPC in S.G. Vombatkare Vs. Union of India (Supra).