Joginder Kumar vs State Of U.P on 25 April, 1994
9. Law laid down in case of Joginder Kumar (supra), is also not attracted to the facts and circumstances of the present case.
Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 11 (0.20 seconds)Central Bureau Of Investigation ... vs Anil Kumar Sharma, The Then Branch ... on 20 February, 2019
8. Prima facie, not only a cognizable case is made out, but also there is reliable evidence available on record as is apparent from the order of termination enclosed by the petitioner no. 1 and in view of such facts, no protection is required especially in view of law laid down by Hon'ble Supreme Court in case of State Represented by the C.B.I. vs. Anil Sharma as reported in AIR 1997 SC 3806, wherein it observed and approved the submission of the C.B.I. that "custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation orientated than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this effective interrogation of suspected person is of tremendous advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible Police Officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders."