• About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Contact Us
Friday, March 5, 2021
Law Trend
  • google-play
  • apple-store
  • Login
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend - हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
  • Webinar
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
No Result
View All Result
Law Trend
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend - हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
  • Webinar
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
No Result
View All Result
Law Trend
No Result
View All Result

Period of 90/60 days for computing default bail starts from the date of remand and not from unlawful custody

by Law Trend
February 9, 2021
in Judgements, Trending Stories
2 min read
Bombay HC new 1
762
SHARES
2.2k
VIEWS
Share on FacebookShare on TwitterShare via WhatsappShare via EmailPinterest

While rejecting senior-journalist Gautam Nalakha’s bail petition, the Bombay High Court observed that time spent in unlawful custody couldn’t be included while computing ninety days period prescribed for grant of bail in default u/s 167(2) of CrPC.

Navlakha was arrested in the Elgar Parishad Maoist case twice. First time on 28.08.2018 and second time when surrendered on 14.04.2020. Following an order passed by Delhi High Court, he was placed under house arrest but was released after his arrest was declared illegal by the Court.

The Division Bench ruled that the 34 days that Navlakha had spent in house arrest cannot be used when computing his total detention period as that arrest was illegal according to the Delhi High Court. 

According to the Court, there is no doubt that Navlakha was under house arrest, and during that time, he could only interact with his family and lawyers. Investigative agencies did not interrogate him as the High Court had directed him to be kept at the same place where he was arrested.

Hon’ble Court held that Section 167(2) of CrPC, assumes that a magistrate authorised the detention and the 90 days can be used when calculating period for default bail. But, if the Magistrate’s authorisation was declared illegal, the house arrest period cannot be termed as authorised custody within the meaning of 167(2).

Navlakha is an accused under various sections of Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, and NIA is investigating the allegations. He moved the Bombay High Court after his application for default bail was rejected by a special NIA court in June 2020.

To arrive at its decision, the Court relied on Chaganti Satyanarayana and others vs State of Andhra Pradesh where the Apex Court held that the period of 90 days or 60 days, will start running from the date of remand and not from any other date even though the accused may have been taken into custody earlier by a police officer and deprived of his liberty.

Click to Read/Download Judgment

Tags: bombay high courtright of default bailtrend2

Related Posts

supreme court 2021 2
Judgements

Can Non-explanation or False Explanation by Accused U/s 313 CrpC be used to complete chain of Circumstances? SC

March 4, 2021
ncdrc
Court Updates

Can Consumer Court Entertain Complaint After Adjudication of Dispute in Arbitration? NCDRC

March 4, 2021
Supreme Court 2021
Trending Stories

We Should Send a Message to the Bar that the Apex Court Will Not Adjourn the Matter for Nothing: SC

March 4, 2021

Advertisement

POPULAR NEWS

  • Justice Pushpa V Ganediwala lawtrend

    Bombay HC Judge who gave “Skin to Skin” POCSO Verdict loses Judgeship Confirmation

    5733 shares
    Share 2293 Tweet 1433
  • Where is the Provision of Using Advocate Sticker on Vehicle?

    5119 shares
    Share 2048 Tweet 1280
  • What is the tenure of protection granted under Anticipatory Bail? :SC 5 Judges

    4831 shares
    Share 1932 Tweet 1207
  • Air Asia Crashes Against Gaurav Taneja; Court Says Airline Suppressed Facts

    4702 shares
    Share 1881 Tweet 1176
  • Husband-Wife Take Oath as High Court Judge

    3271 shares
    Share 1308 Tweet 818
Law Trend

Rabhyaa Foundation has started this platform on values enshrined in the Preamble of the Constitution of India. The object of this platform is to create informed citizens with recent legal updates, Judgments, Legislations of Parliament and State Legislatures, and views of experts in the field of law, in plain and pointed language, for the intellectual development of citizens.
Our tag line “The Line of Law” guides that this......
Read More

Follow Us On Social Media

Subscribe to our News Letter

Sign Up for weekly newsletter to get the latest news, Updates and amazing offers delivered directly in to your inbox.

Categories

  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Columns
  • Bare Acts and Rules
  • Online Internship
  • About Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Contact Us

© 2020 Law Trends| All Right Reserved | Designed ByAaratechnologies Pvt Ltd

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • About Us
  • Trending Stories
  • Court Updates
  • Judgements
  • Law Trend – हिन्दी
  • Bare Acts and Rules
    • Central
    • State
      • Uttar Pradesh Acts
      • Uttar Pradesh Rules
      • Uttrakhand
      • DELHI
  • Webinar/Videos
  • Columns
  • Online Internship
  • More
    • Humour
    • Submit Judgment/Order/Posts
    • Quotes
    • Legal Dictionary
    • Courts Weblink
  • Android App
  • IOS APP

© 2020 Law Trends| All Right Reserved | Designed ByAaratechnologies Pvt Ltd

Welcome Back!

Login to your account below

Forgotten Password?

Create New Account!

Fill the forms bellow to register

All fields are required. Log In

Retrieve your password

Please enter your username or email address to reset your password.

Log In