High Court allowed bail to Mohammad Shakir quashing an extension order passed without affording him an opportunity of hearing, holding that his indefeasible right to bail had accrued after the 180-day period expired.
Petition allowed, order of extension quashed, and petitioner released on bail to the satisfaction of the 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.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH
Sr. No.: 201
Criminal Miscellaneous No.M-27279 of 2015 (O & M) Date of Decision: September 24, 2015
Mohammad Shakir
..... PETITIONER
VERSUS
State of Punjab
..... RESPONDENT
. . .
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASPAL SINGH
. . .
. . .
PRESENT : - Mr. R.S. Tacoria, Advocate, for the petitioner.
Mr. Sandeep Kumar Bansal, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab.
. . .
Jaspal Singh, J
petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. read with Section 482 Cr.P.C. and 167(2) Cr.P.C. for quashing of order of extension dated July 13, 2015 (Annexure P-8) passed under Section 36-A(4) of the Narcotics Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, ‘Act’) as well as seeking bail in case FIR No.131 dated December 14, 2014, registered under
AVIN KUMAR 2015.10.06 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No.M-27279 of 2015 [2]
Section 22 of the Act, registered at Police Station Bannur, District Patiala, presently District SAS Nagar (Mohali).
AVIN KUMAR 2015.10.06 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
Crl. Misc. No.M-27279 of 2015 [3]
petitioner nor his counsel was present on the day when application under Section 36-A(4) of the Act was disposed of vide consolidated order dated June 15, 2015. The aforesaid circumstances are suggestive of the fact that present petitioner as not heard while passing order dated June 15, 2015 extending the period for presentation of report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. Subsequent extension, if any, is of no value in the eyes of law, especially in the circumstances that an indefeasible right has accrued to the petitioner after expiry of period of 180 days from the date of his arrest. Thus, an indefeasible right which has accrued to the petitioner cannot be extinguished or scuttled down by the trial court just by allowing the application for extension of time that too without affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner against whom the said order was passed.
(Jaspal Singh) September 24, 2015 Judge avin
AVIN KUMAR 2015.10.06 11:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an order extending the time for submission of charge-sheet under NDPS Act without hearing the accused violates constitutional principles.
Whether an indefeasible right to bail accrued upon expiry of the 180-day period can be extinguished by allowing an extension without hearing the petitioner.
5 provisions across 2 enactments
Mohammad Shakir
State of Punjab
Jaspal Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
