VICKY BHARAT KALYANI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these Petitions raise a common legal issue regarding interpretation of Sec. 50 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, 'Cr.P.C.'). In some of the Petitions, the interpretation of Ss. 41 & 41A of Cr.P.C. is also necessary. The common contention in all these Petitions is the alleged violation of these provisions rendering the Petitioners' continued detention in custody as illegal detention. The Petitioners are seeking their release on this ground. The facts pertaining to these Petitions individually are obviously different and, therefore, before considering the fact situation in each of these Petitions separately, we thought it fit to consider the interpretation of these provisions. Subject to such interpretation, an individual Petition from this group can be decided separately. To afford an opportunity to the counsel appearing for both the sides, we have listed these matters together.

(2.) We have heard respective learned counsel for the Petitioners as well as a Petitioner appearing as party in-person, in various Petitions. On the other hand, learned Advocate General Dr. Birendra Saraf, Learned Public Prosecutor Mr. Venegavkar, Learned counsel Ms. Nitee Punde and learned counsel Mrs.Aruna Pai appeared for the Respondents.

(3.) Learned Advocate General put forth the perspective on the issue on behalf of the State of Maharashtra. Mrs. Aruna Pai and Ms. Nitee Punde, appeared on behalf of the respective investigating agencies.