The court disposed of a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. setting aside orders remanding a PMLA accused to custody, directing him to seek bail in the trial court.
Set aside orders dated 07.01.2019, 06.02.2019 and 01.03.2019; direction to file bail application in trial court.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Page No.# 1/3
GAHC010050372019
THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT
(HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH)
Case No. : Crl.Pet. 252/2019
1:DIGANTA CHAKRABORTY S/O LATE TRAILOKESH CHAKRABORTY, R/O ARIADAHA RATHALA, SHREE GOPAL MALICK ROAD, KOLKATA, WEST BENGAL, PIN-700057
VERSUS
1:THE DIRECTORATE OF ENFORCEMENT, GOVT. OF INDIA REPRESENTED BY ITS ASSTT. DIRECTOR (PMLA), RAJGARH ROAD, BYE LANE NO. 1, H/NO 20, 2ND FLORR, GUWAHATI-3
Advocate for the Petitioner : MS. P CHAKRABORTY
Advocate for the Respondent :
BEFORE
HONOURABLE MRS. JUSTICE RUMI KUMARI PHUKAN
ORDER
Date : 08-03-2019
Heard Ms. P Chakraborty, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. SK Medhi, learned standing counsel appearing for the Directorate of Enforcement Department.
The petitioner herein, namely Diganta Chakraborty aged about 62 years is facing trial before the Court of learned Sessions Judge in respect of PMLA Case No.8/17, wherein offence report has been submitted as against 12 accused persons including the present petitioner. The case is at the stage of appearance for all the accused persons and one of the accused person, named Biju Kakati is yet to appear. The present accused petitioner although appearing before the court, but on last two occasions i.e., 07.01.2019 and 06.02.2019 he could not turn up before the
Page No.# 2/3
Court for which the Court issued NBWA against him and on 01.03.2019 he appeared before the Court assigning reasons and with a prayer to recall the warrant of arrest. The learned trial Court was pleased to reject the petition as there was no explanation for his absence on 07.01.2019 and 06.02.2019 and he was remanded to custody fixing 15.03.2019.
Now the present petition has been preferred challenging the aforesaid order dated 07.01.2019, 06.02.2019 and 01.03.2019 that there was no intentional default on the part of the petitioner and because of miscommunication with the engaged counsel, the date so fixed by the Court i.e., 07.01.2019 and 06.02.2019 was not communicated to him. It is stated that the petitioner is a retired person aged about 62 years and is ready and willing to face the trial and undertake not to repeat such episode in future and by way of this petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has prayed for setting aside the order dated 07.01.2019 and 06.02.2019.
I have heard the learned standing counsel on the matter and also gone through the documents annexed there with. In view of the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner that he is ready to face trial regularly without any default in future and that he has voluntarily appeared before the Court on 01.03.2019, the ends of justice demanded that the explanation given by the accused should be accepted.
It appears that in fact there is no illegality or irregularity in the order dated 07.01.2019 and 06.02.2019 passed by the Court. However, having regard to the submission made before this Court and considering the entirety of the matter that the trial has not yet began, the petition stands disposed of by setting aside the orders dated 07.01.2019 and 06.02.2019 with a direction to the petitioner to file application for bail before the learned trial Court and the learned trial Court shall consider the same and allow him to go on bail with adequate surety and condition.
The criminal petition stands disposed of.
JUDGE
Smita
Page No.# 3/3
Comparing Assistant
2 issues framed by the court
Whether to set aside the orders remanding the petitioner to custody due to alleged miscommunication regarding court dates.
Whether the petitioner is eligible to be granted bail despite prior defaults.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Diganta Chakraborty
The Directorate of Enforcement, Govt. of India
Rumi Kumari Phukan
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
