Shivani Gadhavi-
Published On: November 14, 2021 at 15:12 IST
The Delhi High Court put a Stay on Tis Hazari Court’s order which did not grant Bail to an Accused because of the Investigating Officer’s Negligence in the Investigation.
Justice Chandra Dhari Singh of the Delhi High Court stated in the order, “It is a settled position of law that the lower courts are not akin to Constitutional Courts. While deciding an application under Section 439 of the Code, the courts are bound to decide it within the four corners of the Statue.”
The HC mentioned in this instance that Supreme Court had highlighted the case of Sangitaben Shaileshbhai Datanta v. State of Gujarat [(2019) 14 SCC 522] and examined the extent of power under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
In this case, the High Court after granting the Bail to the Accused ordered the Accused and his relatives to undergo a scientific medical test.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court deprecated such practice of the High Court because in doing so the High Court violated the Statutory Requirements under Section 439 of the Code.
In the Case of State V Murgusen, the SC stated, “The jurisdiction of the Court under Section 439 of the Code is limited to grant or not to grant bail pending trial. Even though the object of the Hon’ble Judge was laudable but the jurisdiction exercised was clearly erroneous. The effort made by the Hon’ble Judge may be academically proper to be presented at an appropriate forum but such directions could not be issued under the colour of office of the Court.”
In the current case, the Delhi High Court has heard the Plea of an Accused husband for his wife’s Murder, in the Plea the Accused challenged the Order of Additional Sessions Judge Vishal Singh’s order and requested for an ‘ad-interim ex parte’ order.
The Order of the ASJ in question stated, “IO has not collected an iota of evidence related to the mobile calls and communication between the deceased with her parents. This is only one of the numerous aspects of the case regarding which IO seems to have deliberately or negligently failed to collect evidence.” In this regard, the ASJ did not grant Bail to the Accused.
The HC ordered the Sessions Court to reconsider its Order and make a Judgment with respect to Section 439 of the Code.
Click Here to Read/Download the Order
Also Read: Delhi Court seeks Police response on Double Jeopardy FIR
Witnesses can record Statements via Video Conferencing in Rajasthan District Courts