CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Vs. MOTILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) LEAVE granted. Issue notice. Mr. Sanjeev Sachdeva, Advocate accepts notice for Respondent 1 Moti Lal. Due to exigency both sides agreed that the matter can be heard and disposed of today.

(2.) A complaint has been filed against the first respondent Moti Lal for the offence under S. 49-B of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972 read with S. 51 of the said Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). The first respondent was arrested in September 2000 and remained in judicial custody. Nonetheless, he has chosen to move habeas corpus writ petition before the Allahabad High Court. A Division Bench of the High Court by the impugned order allowed the writ petition and ordered him to be set free forthwith. The learned Judges of the Division Bench thought that the offence pitted against the first respondent was under S. 50(3) of the Act.

(3.) THERE is no warrant for making the above observations as the offence alleged against the first respondent was under S. 49-B read with S. 51 of the said Act. When the arrest was made in accordance with law and he was remanded to judicial custody, we do not find any scope for the High Court to entertain a habeas corpus writ petition and quash the same without looking into the purport of the order under which he was remanded to judicial custody.