STELDA THABAH Vs. STATE OF MEGHALAYA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein is the mother of the accused, who was arrested on 3rd October, 1993 in connection with Nongstoin PS Case No. 78(10) 193 for alleged offence punishable U/s 506 IPC, which was subsequently registered as G. R. Case No. 80/93 U/s 506 IPC. He was produced before the Magistrate on 4.10.93 and remanded to police custody for two days by Addl. Deputy Commissioner, Nongstoin and after expiry of the period of police custody, on 6.10.93 he was remanded to judicial custody, without being produced before any Magistrate or Court and thereafter the period of judicial custody was extended from time to time without the accused being even produced before the Magistrate. At times, the period of remand of judicial custody exceeded the statutory limit, even by more than a month. The petitioner has averred that on 17.3.94, charge sheet No. 3/94 dated 28.2.94 was submitted but no copies of the documents as required U/s 207 Cr PC were supplied to the accused. During all these period the accused remained incarcerated and at no point of time he was informed either by the police officer arresting him, or the Presiding Officer of the Court that he had a right to be released on bail .

(2.) On 4.5.95, the petitioner's younger son, brother of the accused, applied for certified copies of the charge sheet, the FIR and the orders passed by the Court in G. R. Case No. 80/93, the certified copies as supplied are placed on record. Petitioner's grievance is that copy of the FIR though applied for was not supplied to the petitioner. Petitioner's grievance is that the offence U/s 506 IPC being punishable with two years imprisonment with fine or both. In the instant case, the petitioner, because of non performance of duty by the police officer and the Magistrate, the accused suffered imprisonment for more than one year and eight months for no fault of his and was prevented from being released on bail.

(3.) The accused is an illiterate villager, his rights under Articles 14, 21 and 22 of the Constitution have been violated by the respondents with impunity. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has prayed for quashing of the proceedings and also claim compensation for illegal and unlawful detention of the accused.