JUSTIN T.J Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition is filed under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ("the Code" for the sake of brevity) challenging the order dtd. 24/5/2023 in C.M.P.No.1361/2023 on the file of the Special Court for SC/ST(POA) Act & NDPS Act Cases, Manjeri. By the order impugned, the learned Additional Sessions Judge allowed the application filed by the learned Public Prosecutor under Sec. 36A(4) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 ("NDPS Act" for brevity) and allowed the detention of the accused for a further period of 90 days.

(2.) Before adverting to the contentions of the petitioner to assail the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge, I shall narrate the undisputed facts.

(3.) Sri. Vinay, the learned counsel, submitted that the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge cannot be sustained under law. Relying on the law laid down by the Apex Court in Sanjay Dutt v State through the C.B.I. Bombay,(1994) 5 SCC 410. and Jigar alias Jimmy Pravinchandra Adatiya v. State of Gujarat,2022 SCC Online SC 1290. it was submitted by the learned counsel that it is mandatory for the Court of Sessions to inform the accused with regards to the filing of an application under Sec. 36A(4) of the NDPS Act, for extension of period and also to insist for the presence of the accused at the time when the Court considers the application for extension submitted by the learned Public Prosecutor. He pointed out that except for giving the notice of the application, the court did not secure the presence of the accused either virtually or physically on the date on which the application was heard. Relying on the law laid down by the Apex Court in Uday Mohanlal Acharya v. State of Maharashtra,2001(5) SCC 453. and in M. Ravindran v. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence,(2021) 2 SCC 485. it was submitted by the learned counsel that the learned Sessions Judge is bound to consider the application for default bail along with the application for extension of time and pass orders together. In the case on hand, the application for default bail was filed on 23/5/2023, and the same was rejected only on 2/6/2023, whereas the application for extension was allowed for granting 3 months on 24/5/2023. The learned counsel would then refer to the law laid down in Judgebir Singh alias Jasbir Singh Samra alias Jasbir and Ors. v. National Investigation Agency,2023 SCC OnLine SC 543. and it was urged that the right to be released on default bail continues to remain enforceable if the accused has applied for such bail, notwithstanding the pendency of the bail application or subsequent filing of the charge sheet or a report seeking extension of time, and the court could not have said that since the extension application is pending, it shall pass orders on the default bail application only after the extension application was decided.