SWETABH SUMAN Vs. CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) YESTERDAY, I dictated an order in the Court. By that, I permitted four weeks' time to the applicants to obtain bail, but, at the same time, provided that the applicants shall not be arrested for five weeks and, even if a decision is taken to take the applicants in custody, the said decision shall remain postponed till five weeks. While the order came up before me for my signature, it appeared that the same is not a permissible order, as the same will interfere with a perfectly valid decision to be taken by a competent court subsequent to that order, but, by virtue of the order passed, the same will remain of no effect at least till such time, the time as directed by this Court will expire. I, accordingly, did not sign that order and, at the same time, informed the learned counsel for the parties that the matters will be considered on merit today.

(2.) HEARD learned counsel for the parties. Considered the orders impugned in these Applications passed on 3rd March, 2011. Before the said orders were passed, there is no dispute that after the Central Bureau of Investigation submitted a police report, the Special Judge duly took cognizance thereon. Subsequent thereto, Special Judge issued summons. In the summons issued on 21st September, 2010, the applicants were asked to appear before the Special Judge on 3rd November, 2010, either in person or through Advocate to be engaged by the applicants. The applicants caused their appearance through Advocate on 3rd November, 2010 and, at the same time, applied for exemption of their personal appearance. Such exemption was granted by an order, whereby, it was mentioned that the applicants would be required to appear on 6th December, 2010. Before 6th December, 2010, by virtue of an order passed by this Court on a separate proceeding, the proceedings before the Special Judge were stayed. That stay order was vacated subsequent thereto. The order of vacation of the said stay order was brought to the knowledge of the Special Judge by the Central Bureau of Investigation by filing an application seeking non-bailable warrants against the applicants, which was considered on 31st January, 2011, when he directed appearance of the applicants on 3rd March, 2011. On 3rd March, 2011, the applicants, through their Advocate, filed an application for exemption. Purporting to have rejected the said application, by the impugned order dated 3rd March, 2011, the Special Judge directed issuance of non-bailable warrants against the applicants with a further direction for production of the applicants on 1st April, 2011.

(3.) BE that as it may, the order impugned appears to be without application of mind and, accordingly, the same is set aside, insofar as the applicants are concerned. Let the applicants cause their appearance before the Special Judge on or before 4th April, 2011.