STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. BAPU PANDU MALI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal has come before us in peculiar circumstances. While, in another appeal, certain orders are passed by the Court in Criminal Appeal No. 1155 of 2005, it was revealed that the respondent in this appeal is languishing in jail for 5 years, although he had been acquitted of the offences by the learned Sessions Judge. After his acquittal in year 2003, the State filed an appeal against his acquittal, and the High Court issued a Warrant of Arrest under Section 390 of the Criminal Procedure Code. It appears that the learned Sessions Judge, after executing the warrant of this Court, offered bail to the respondent, but he could not provide surety. Therefore, he languished in jail.

(2.) We understand that the offence in this case was committed in year 1999. The accused was arrested on 30th March, 1999. He could not get bail during the trial, and as a result, for more than 10 years now, he is in jail, although he has been acquitted by a Court of law 5 years before.

(3.) This is a sorry state of affairs in which not only the prosecuting agency but also the Courts are involved. This is a reflection on our own system, which needs to be corrected. A person, who is acquitted of the charges by a Court of law, should not remain in jail even for a day after acquittal, unless the order of acquittal is reversed by an appellate Court. Even if the acquittal of the respondent were to be set aside by this Court today, even then, we cannot justify his detention after his acquittal by the Sessions Court till date.