Sale Deeds Must Be Interpreted Literally When the Language is Clear and Unambiguous: Supreme Court    |     Non-Signatory Can Be Bound by Arbitration Clause Based on Conduct and Involvement: Supreme Court    |     Right to Passport is a Fundamental Right, Denial Without Justification Violates Article 21: Allahabad High Court    |     Insurance Company's Liability Remains Despite Policy Cancellation Due to Dishonored Cheque: Calcutta High Court    |     Deductions Under Sections 36(1)(vii) and 36(1)(viia) of the Income Tax Act Are Independent and Cannot Be Curtailed: Bombay High Court    |     Diary Entries Cannot Alone Implicate the Accused Without Corroborative Evidence: Supreme Court Upholds Discharge of Accused in Corruption Case    |     MACT | Fraud Vitiates All Judicial Acts, Even Without Specific Review Powers: Rajasthan High Court    |     Right of Private Defense Cannot Be Weighed in Golden Scales: Madhya Pradesh High Court Acquits Appellant in Culpable Homicide Case    |     If Two Reasonable Conclusions Are Possible, Acquittal Should Not Be Disturbed: Supreme Court    |     Kalelkar Award Explicitly Provides Holiday Benefits for Temporary Employees, Not Subject to Government Circulars: Supreme Court Upholds Holiday and Overtime Pay    |     NDPS | Homogeneous Mixing of Bulk Drugs Essential for Valid Sampling Under NDPS Act: Punjab & Haryana High Court    |     Pre-Arrest Bail Not a Right but an Exception: Himachal High Court Denied Bail In Dowry Death Case"    |     POCSO | Scholar Register Is Sufficient to Determine Victim’s Age in POCSO Cases: Madhya Pradesh High Court    |     Abuse of Official Position in Appointments: Prima Facie Case for Criminal Misconduct: Delhi High Court Upholds Framing of Charges Against Swati Maliwal in DCW Corruption Case    |     Service Law | Similarly Situated Employees Cannot Be Denied Equal Treatment: PH High Court Orders Regularization    |     Presumption of Innocence Remains Supreme Unless Clearly Overturned: PH High Court Affirming Acquittal    |     Any Physical Liaison with A Girl Of Less Than Eighteen Years Is A Strict Offense.: Patna High Court Reiterates Strict Stance On Sexual Offences Against Minors    |     Orissa High Court Rules Res Judicata Inapplicable When Multiple Appeals Arise from Same Judgment    |     Mandatory Section 80 Notice Cannot Be Bypassed Lightly:  Jammu & Kashmir High Court Returns Plaint for Non-Compliance    |     Bombay High Court Denies Permanent Lecturer Appointment for Failing to Meet UGC Eligibility Criteria at Time of Appointment    |     Deferred Cross-Examination Gave Time for Witness Tampering, Undermining Fair Trial: Allahabad High Court    |     Dowry Death | Presumption Under Section 113-B Not Applicable as No Proof of Cruelty Soon Before Death : Supreme Court    |     Gift Deed Voided as Son Fails to Care for Elderly Mother, Karnataka High Court Asserts ‘Implied Duty’ in Property Transfers    |     Denial of a legible 164 statement is a denial of a fair trial guaranteed by the Constitution of India: Kerala High Court    |     Safety Shoes Used as Weapon Meets Mens Rea Requirement for Murder: Rajasthan HC on Bail Denial    |     Fraud on the Courts Cannot Be Tolerated: Supreme Court Ordered CBI Investigation Against Advocate    |     Land Acquisition | Jaiprakash Associates Ltd. (JAL) Liable for Compensation under Supplementary Award, Not Ultra-Tech Cement Ltd.: Supreme Court    |     Non-Mentioning of Bail Orders in Detention Reflects Clear Non-Application of Mind: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Order    |     Conviction Under Arms Act and Criminal Conspiracy Quashed Due to Non-Seizure of Key Evidence and Failure to Prove Ownership of Box: Jharkhand High Court    |     Prima Facie Proof of Valid Marriage Required Before Awarding Maintenance Under Section 125 Cr.P.C: Calcutta High Court Sets Aside Interim Maintenance Order    |    

Approver Released From Custody Despite Mandatory Detention; Judicial Discretion Favors Humane Consideration Over Rigorous Interpretation of Law: Delhi High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant judgment by the Delhi High Court, Justice Swarana Kanta Sharma has ordered the release of Amit Chakraborty, an approver in a case involving unlawful activities and conspiracy, from judicial custody. The court exercised its inherent powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) to override the mandatory detention provision under Section 306(4)(b) of the Cr.P.C.

The petitioner, Amit Chakraborty, was involved in a conspiracy linked to illegal funding activities threatening the sovereignty and integrity of India, registered under various sections of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act and the Indian Penal Code. Arrested in October 2023, Chakraborty was later granted pardon upon agreeing to become an approver. Despite this, statutory provisions mandated his continued custody until the trial's conclusion.

The court delved into the principles underlying Section 482 of the Cr.P.C., which allows for judicial discretion to intervene in cases to prevent the abuse of process or to secure the ends of justice. Citing multiple precedents, Justice Sharma highlighted the importance of considering individual circumstances over strict statutory interpretations that might contravene constitutional rights under Article 21.

Tender of Pardon and Judicial Precedents: The judgment reflected on several landmark decisions which established that High Courts, utilizing their inherent powers, can release an approver from custody to uphold justice and prevent undue hardship.

Medical Condition and Humanitarian Grounds: Chakraborty’s severe post-polio residual paralysis and his consequent physical limitations significantly influenced the court’s decision. It emphasized a "humane and understanding approach" over a mechanical application of law.

Procedural Safeguards and Future Compliance: The court mandated that Chakraborty adhere strictly to the conditions of his pardon, including truthful testimony and compliance with all court directives. The potential application of Section 308 of Cr.P.C. was noted, which provides for penal consequences if Chakraborty fails to meet these conditions.

Decision: Justice Sharma ordered Chakraborty's release on a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with stringent conditions, balancing legal mandates with considerations of individual rights and medical exigencies.

Date of Decision: May 6, 2024.

Amit Chakraborty vs. State NCT of Delhi,

Similar News