R K TULA CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF MANIPUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner earlier filed a petition before this Court regarding F.I.R. Case No. 163(9)79 Mairang Police station and by our order dated 120.2.85 we directed the trial of the accused to be completed within three months or so. The Additional Sessions Judge (1), Manipur released the petitioner on bail in the said case on 1.3.85. But the very moment the petitioner: was brought out of the Jail ward he was re-arrested at the jail gate in a new F.I.R. Case No. 178(7)79 of Singjamai Police Station. The petitioner filed his second petition dated 5.3.85 with reference to F.I.R. Case No. 178(7)79 of Singjamai Police Station. While he was in dark about its result, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Imphal granted him bail on 13.3.85 but the release was delayed till 22.3.85, when he was released on 22.3.85, he was re-arrested at the jail gate said to be in F.I.R. Case No. 552(7)78 of Imphal Police Station.

(2.) The petitioner questions as to why he was not implicated in this case while he had been languishing in Jail since 1980 and why the authorities chose the moment of his release on bail for his re-arrest to make him languish further in Jail? Hence he has submitted this petition.

(3.) Mr. G. Uzir, the learned counsel appearing as Amicus Curiae for the petitioner, submits that the petitioner having been released on bail in connection with F.I.R. Case No. 163(9)79 Mairang P.S., the authorities should not have re-arrested him in connection with F.I.R. Case No. 552(7)78 of Imphal P.S. which case was earlier than the case in which he was released. Counsel prays that this Court should issue a direction not to re-arrest the petitioner in connection with the earlier cases after he has been released on bail in connection with F.I.R. Case No. 163(9)79 of Mairang P.S. and to declare that his re-arrest in connection with the said F.I.R. Case No. 552(7)78, which was an earlier case, is illegal and that the petitioner should be set at liberty forthwith.