JUDGEMENT
H.N.Seth, J. -
(1.) By this petition under Article 226 of the Constitution, petitioner Rajendra Gosain who is being
detained in the District Jail, Banda ever since 11th Aug., 1979, challenges the validity of his
detention and prays for a writ of habeas corpus. According to him, his detention has been
rendered invalid inasmuch as the persons responsible for the same have contravened the
provisions of Article 22 of the Constitution and the Code of Criminal Procedure. He also claims
that as at present there is no valid order from any competent Court authorising the
Superintendent of District Jail, Banda to keep him in custody, he is entitled to be set at liberty
forthwith.
(2.) The case of the respondents, on the other hand is that to begin with the petitioner was lodged
in the District Jail Banda on 12th Aug., 1979 in pursuance of a warrant of remand in criminal
case No. 323 of 1978 under Section 396, I.P.C. Subsequently petitioner's detention was also
authorised under remand warrants issued by criminal Courts in connection with crime case No.
67 of 1979 under Section 395/397, I.P.C. Police Station Raipura, Crime case No. 256 of 1978
under Sections 395/397, 1. P.C. Police Station Karvi, and crime case No. 42 of 1979 under
Sections 395/397, I.P.C. Police Station Mau. Although the petitioner has been discharged in
crime case No. 323 of 1978, he continues to be under detention in connection with remaining
three cases. According to the respondents, the petitioner has been, in connection with crime case
No. 42 of 1979 committed to Court of Session on 23rd May, 1980 (S. T. No. 162 of 1980) and
his detention during the pendency of the Sessions trial is authorised under a warrant under
Section 290(b), Cr. P.C. Issued by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda on 23rd May, 1980. It
has also been authorised by subsequent endorsement made by the Sessions Court, on the back of
the warrant. Likewise the petitioner has been committed to Court of Session in connection with
crime case No. 67 of 1979 on 10th Sept., 1980 (S. T. No. 360 of 1980) and his detention during
the pendency of the trial has been authorised by the Chief Judicial Magistrate by means of a
warrant under Section 209(b) Cr. P.C. issued at the time of making of the order for petitioner's
commitment.
So far crime case No. 256 of 1978 is concerned, the proceedings for petitioner's commitment are
going on and he is being duly remanded to jail custody and is being detained in that connection
under remand orders made by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Banda from time to time. The
Superintendent of the District Jail, Banda has also produced the originals of the authority on the
basis of which the petitioner is being detained by him in connection with the three cases for our
perusal.
(3.) Sri D.S. Misra, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner, who argued the case before us
with great tenacity tried to make out that in none of the three cases, in connection with which the
petitioner is at present being confined in the District Jail, Banda, is there a valid authority
enabling the Jail authorities to detain the petitioner. He thus claimed that the petitioner is entitled
to be released forthwith. Sri Malviya, learned Additional Government Advocate, appearing for
the respondents, refuted the submission made by Sri Misra and contended that present detention
of the petitioner in connection with the three cases is fully justified under the authority of
criminal Courts, validly exercised. He further contended that if it is found that there exists a valid
authority to detain the petitioner in the District Jail. Banda even in one of the three cases, it will
not be possible for this Court to issue a writ of habeas corpus and to direct his release,;
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.