7 days ago
Give adequate time to NDPS accused for probe expansion: HC
1
2
Kolkata: The prosecution needed to give adequate notice to an accused or his/her counsel in an NDPS case before the prayer for an extension of time for the probe was considered, the Calcutta High Court held while granting bail to a man, arrested with 1.4kg brown sugar by Kaliachak PS cops on Aug 13, 2024.
The public prosecutor sought an extension of time to submit the charge sheet as the chemical report of the substance was not collected and the other accused were yet to be caught. The extension was granted on Feb 7, 2025.
But the statutory period was to be over on Feb 9, 2025, a Sunday. The prosecution moved the application for an extension of time on the immediately preceding Friday, with a notice served on the advocate of the accused at 4.20 pm, 10 minutes before the court closed.
The next date was a non-working Saturday. "The counsel could not have contacted his client, who was in custody, to take proper instructions from him and advance his submissions before the magistrate," Justice Jay Sengupta noted on May 19.
The accused on Feb 10 prayed for releasing him on statutory bail and to recall the Feb 7 order. But the judge rejected it. The counsel said, "The special court's failure to procure the presence of the accused, either physically or virtually, at the time of considering the application for extension of the probe period rendered the extension order dated Feb 7 illegal."
by Taboola
by Taboola
Sponsored Links
Sponsored Links
Promoted Links
Promoted Links
You May Like
나이들어 노안+백내장 절대 방치 하지 마세요!
부산백내장노안 전문안과
더 알아보기
Undo
While the counsel for the accused argued it was mandatory to produce the accused at the time when the question of extension of the period of investigation was being considered by the court, the state contended it was not the production but that the accused had to be made aware of such prayer of the prosecution.
The judge noted, " Notifying the counsel cannot be a goal by itself. The purpose is to ensure he can obtain instructions from the accused for advancement of his submissions to the court at the relevant time."
The judge noted the prosecution failed to give adequate notice to the accused or his counsel before their prayer for an extension of time was considered. The accused was not present physically or virtually.
"In view of the violation of the ratios of courts, the order/s remanding the accused and extending time for probe are set aside and the petitioner is entitled to be released on statutory bail. The probe agency can make an application for extension of time after complying with the requirements...," Justice Sengupta said.
