SASIKUMAR MURDER
Remand can be extended only for spl reasons : HC
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Chennai 26.09.2018
Making it clear that special courts trying cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act have the power to directly extend the remand of accused from 90 days to 180 days, the Madras high court has said that such an order shall be passed
only based on special/specific reasons submitted by the prosecution.
A division bench of Justice S Vimala and Justice S Ramathilagam made the observation while setting aside an order passed by the special court for NIA cases in Poonamallee extending the remand of Mohammed Mubarak, an accused in the murder of Hindu Munnani leader Sasikumar.
Refusing to concur with the contentions of the petitioner that the trial court cannot directly extend the remand to 180 days, the bench said, “Section 43-D (2)(b) of the Act employs the term ‘up to’ for extending the period of remand from 90 days to 180 days. This clearly means that the maximum period up to which the remand can be extended is up to the period as specified under the Act. Had the intention of the legislature been otherwise, then the word ‘up to’ would not have found place in the said provision. The usage of the word clearly shows the intention of the legislature, which thought it fit to leave it to the wisdom of the court to extend the period of remand, however, subject to the limitations as envisaged under the second limb of Section 43-D
(2) (b) of the UAP Act.”
However, in the present case, pointing out the report of prosecution, the bench said, the report is mere indicative of the progress made in the investigation and the phases in which investigation needs to be made.
Remand can be extended only for spl reasons : HC
TIMES NEWS NETWORK
Chennai 26.09.2018
Making it clear that special courts trying cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act have the power to directly extend the remand of accused from 90 days to 180 days, the Madras high court has said that such an order shall be passed
only based on special/specific reasons submitted by the prosecution.
A division bench of Justice S Vimala and Justice S Ramathilagam made the observation while setting aside an order passed by the special court for NIA cases in Poonamallee extending the remand of Mohammed Mubarak, an accused in the murder of Hindu Munnani leader Sasikumar.
Refusing to concur with the contentions of the petitioner that the trial court cannot directly extend the remand to 180 days, the bench said, “Section 43-D (2)(b) of the Act employs the term ‘up to’ for extending the period of remand from 90 days to 180 days. This clearly means that the maximum period up to which the remand can be extended is up to the period as specified under the Act. Had the intention of the legislature been otherwise, then the word ‘up to’ would not have found place in the said provision. The usage of the word clearly shows the intention of the legislature, which thought it fit to leave it to the wisdom of the court to extend the period of remand, however, subject to the limitations as envisaged under the second limb of Section 43-D
(2) (b) of the UAP Act.”
However, in the present case, pointing out the report of prosecution, the bench said, the report is mere indicative of the progress made in the investigation and the phases in which investigation needs to be made.
No comments:
Post a Comment