STATE OF H.P. Vs. VIDYA SAGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition under Section 397, 401 read with section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter referred to as the Code) is directed against two orders dated 21.11.2002 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla.

(2.) Brief facts, relevant and material for the purpose of the present petition, are that the respondents were arrested in a case under Section 20 of the NDPS Act and were detained in judicial custody. The authorised period of their detention was to expire on 21.11.2002. On the said day respondent Dharampal was produced before the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla and was remanded by the learned Sessions Judge to judicial custody till 5.12.2002. The other respondent, namely, Vidya Sagar (hereafter referred to as "the accused") was, however, not so produced with the result that the learned Sessions Judge did not pass orders authorising his further detention for want of his production. It appears that at a later stage, the accused was produced in the court along with an application from the Jail Superintendent with the prayer to extend the period of his judicial custody. However, there was no prayer for his remand from the Station House Officer or the Police Officer competent to make such a prayer under Section 167 of the Code nor copies of the case diaries were produced on the basis of which the learned Sessions Judge could take a decision regarding further remand of the accused. In the absence of any prayer from the S.H.O. / other competent Officer for remand of the accused and in the absence of production of case claries, the (earned Sessions Judge declined to remand the accused to custody. The accused was produced before the learned Additional Sessions Judge on 23.11.2002 who remanded him to judicial custody. Feeling aggrieved by the orders dated 21.11.2002, passed by the learned Sessions Judge declining to remand the accused to judicial custody, the State has preferred the present petition.

(3.) I have heard the learned Additional Advocate General for the State and the accused and have also perused the records.