Section 436A CrPC Applicable To Special Acts In Absence Of Any Specific Provision : Supreme Court

The Supreme Court observed that Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure would apply to the Special Acts also in the absence of any specific provision.The bench comprising Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM Sundresh also added that this provision requires mandatory compliance and there is not even a need for a bail application in a case of this nature particularly when the reasons for delay are not attributable against the accused.These observations have been made in the judgment titled Satender Kumar Antil vs Central Bureau Of Investigation | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 577 .The bench noted that Section 436A of the Code has been inserted by Act 25 of 2005. Under this provision, when a person has undergone detention for a period extending to one-half of the maximum period of imprisonment specified for that offense, he shall be released by the court on his personal bond with or without sureties. The court made the following observations:Word 'trial' will have to be given an expanded meaning particularly when an appeal or admission is pendingThis provision has got a laudable object behind it, particularly from the point of view of granting bail. This provision draws the maximum period for which an undertrial prisoner can be detained. This period has to be reckoned with the custody of the accused during the investigation, inquiry and trial. We have already explained that the word 'trial' will have to be given an expanded meaning particularly when an appeal or admission is pending. Thus, in a case where an appeal is pending for a longer time, to bring it under Section 436A, the period of incarceration in all forms will have to be reckoned, and so also for the revision.Mandatory complianceThe word 'shall' clearly denotes the mandatory compliance of this provision. We do feel that there is not even a need for a bail application in a case of this nature particularly when the reasons for delay are not attributable against the accused. We are also conscious of the fact that while taking a decision the public prosecutor is to be heard, and the court, if it is of the view that there is a need for continued detention longer than one-half of the said period, has to do so. However, such an exercise of power is expected to be undertaken sparingly being an exception to the general rule. Once again, we have to reiterate that 'bail is the rule and jail is an exception' coupled with the principle governing the presumption of innocence. We have no doubt in our mind that this provision is a substantive one, facilitating liberty, being the core intendment of Article 21. The only caveat as furnished under the Explanation being the delay in the proceeding caused on account of the accused to be excluded. Applicability to Special ActsTo make it clear, the provision contained in Section 436A of the Code would apply to the Special Acts also in the absence of any specific provision. For example, the rigor as provided under Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not come in the way in such a case as we are dealing with the liberty of a person. We do feel that more the rigor, the quicker the adjudication ought to be. After all, in these types of cases number of witnesses would be very less and there may not be any justification for prolonging the trial. Perhaps there is a need to comply with the directions of this Court to expedite the process and also a stricter compliance of Section 309 of the Code.Case detailsSatender Kumar Antil vs Central Bureau Of Investigation | 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 577 | MA 1849 OF 2021 | 11 July 2022Coram: Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and MM SundreshClick here to Read/Download Judgment

Section 436A CrPC Applicable To Special Acts In Absence Of Any Specific Provision : Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags