RAJINDER Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD . The petitioner, who is arrested in connection with an offence under section 15 of the NDPS Act, has filed this application for bail. The submission of learned counsel for the petitioner is that the Challan was not produced within the specified period as required under section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and, therefore, he is entitled to be released on bail.

(2.) FROM the order of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar it can be found that the accused was arrested on 4.7.1996 and produced on 5.7.1996 and on that day he was remanded to police custody. It is also stated in the order that the Challan was presented on 3.10.1996. As per decision in the case of State of M.P. v. Rustam and others, 1995 SC Cases (Cri) 830 the day on which the accused is remanded to judicial custody should be excluded and the day on which Challan is filed in the court should be included. In that case the accused was remanded on 3.9.1993 and the challan had been submitted in the court on 2.12.1993. In the present case, even considering the police remand period from 5.7.1996, the period of 90 days will end on 3.10.1996 on which date the challan was presented. Even if we consider that the one day was of police remand as stated by the petitioner himself, the period of detention in judicial remand will be less by further one day. Because of the above discussion, I do not want to express any opinion regarding the period of detention in police remand.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for petitioner has also cited before me the case of Hussainara Khatoon and others v. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, AIR 1979 SC 1377 in which it has been held that when an undertrial prisoner is produced before a Magistrate and he has been in detention for 90 days or 60 days, as the case may be, the Magistrate must before making an order of further remand to judicial custody, point out to the undertrial prisoner that he is entitled to be released on bail and that the State Government must also provide at its own cost a lawyer to the under-trial prisoner with a view to enable him to apply for bail in exercise of his right under proviso (a) to sub-section (2) of section 167 of the Cr.P.C. In view of the above calculations, this case is of no help to the petitioner.