While hearing the application
seeking leave to appeal filed by the State or
the victim as the case may be challenging the
order of acquittal passed by the trial Court,
we have noticed in many cases that the
mandate of provision of Section 437A of Code
of Criminal Procedure is not scrupulously
followed and it creates difficulties and
hindrances to secure presence of
accused/respondent in appeal preferred before
the higher Court. On careful reading of the
said provision, it is abundantly clear that
before conclusion of the trial and before
disposal of the appeal, the Court trying the
offence or the Appellate Court, as the case
may be, shall require the accused to execute
bail bonds with sureties, to appear before
the higher court as and when such Court
issues notice in respect of any appeal or
petition filed against the judgment of the
respective Court and such bail bonds shall be
in force for six months.
In that view of the matter, it is
necessary to bring to the notice of the
learned Judges of the Trial Courts as well as
appellate Courts, dealing with the criminal
matters that they should follow the mandate
of Section 437A of Code of Criminal
Procedure scrupulously before conclusion of
the trial or before disposal of the appeal.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 462 OF 2015
State of Maharashtra V Pappu alias Asraji
S/o Suresh Chavan
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.
Dated: December 02, 2016
Reissue notice to respondent no.3
in Criminal Appeal no. 832 of 2015,
returnable on 4th January, 2017.
2. The learned A.P.P. appearing for the
appellant/State in Criminal Appeal No. 462 of
2015 assures this Court that he will furnish
the correct and complete address of
respondent no.3 before next date of hearing.
3. In these appeals, the appellants
have taken exception to the judgment and
order dated 05.12.2014 passed by the Special
Judge, MCOC Act, Aurangabad, in Special Case
No.8/2009.
4. The learned trial Judge while
passing the impugned judgment and order of
acquittal, has not adhered to the provisions
of Section 437A of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973. The said Section reads as
under :
“437A. Bail to require accused to
appear before next Appellate Court.
(1) Before conclusion of the trial and
before disposal of the appeal, the
Court trying the offence or the
Appellate Court, as the case may be,
shall require the accused to execute
bail bonds with sureties, to appear
before the higher court as and when
such Court issues notice in respect of
any appeal or petition filed against
the judgment of the respective Court
and such bail bonds shall be in force
for six months.
(2) If such accused fails to appear,
the bond stand forfeited and the
procedure under Section 446 shall
apply.”
5. While hearing the application
seeking leave to appeal filed by the State or
the victim as the case may be challenging the
order of acquittal passed by the trial Court,
we have noticed in many cases that the
mandate of provision of Section 437A of Code
of Criminal Procedure is not scrupulously
followed and it creates difficulties and
hindrances to secure presence of
accused/respondent in appeal preferred before
the higher Court. On careful reading of the
said provision, it is abundantly clear that
before conclusion of the trial and before
disposal of the appeal, the Court trying the
offence or the Appellate Court, as the case
may be, shall require the accused to execute
bail bonds with sureties, to appear before
the higher court as and when such Court
issues notice in respect of any appeal or
petition filed against the judgment of the
respective Court and such bail bonds shall be
in force for six months.
6. In that view of the matter, it is
necessary to bring to the notice of the
learned Judges of the Trial Courts as well as
appellate Courts, dealing with the criminal
matters that they should follow the mandate
of Section 437A of Code of Criminal
Procedure scrupulously before conclusion of
the trial or before disposal of the appeal.
7. The copy of this order passed today
be circulated to all the Judges of the trial
Courts and appellate Courts dealing with
criminal matters in Sessions Courts, so as to
appraise them about the provisions of Section
437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure and
ultimately to follow the mandate of said
section in future. It would facilitate for
expeditious hearing of matters before higher
Court after securing presence of accused.
8. The Registrar (Judicial), High Court
of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad
shall ensure that the copy of this order is
circulated by email or any other fastest
mode of communication to all the District and
Sessions Courts and also trial Courts dealing
with the criminal matters throughout the
State of Maharashtra and ask the Registry to
place on record the report of compliance of
today's order.
9. Hearing of these appeals is deferred
by four weeks.
10. Stand over to 4th January, 2017.
Sd/ Sd/
(K.K. SONAWANE, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)
Print Page
seeking leave to appeal filed by the State or
the victim as the case may be challenging the
order of acquittal passed by the trial Court,
we have noticed in many cases that the
mandate of provision of Section 437A of Code
of Criminal Procedure is not scrupulously
followed and it creates difficulties and
hindrances to secure presence of
accused/respondent in appeal preferred before
the higher Court. On careful reading of the
said provision, it is abundantly clear that
before conclusion of the trial and before
disposal of the appeal, the Court trying the
offence or the Appellate Court, as the case
may be, shall require the accused to execute
bail bonds with sureties, to appear before
the higher court as and when such Court
issues notice in respect of any appeal or
petition filed against the judgment of the
respective Court and such bail bonds shall be
in force for six months.
In that view of the matter, it is
necessary to bring to the notice of the
learned Judges of the Trial Courts as well as
appellate Courts, dealing with the criminal
matters that they should follow the mandate
of Section 437A of Code of Criminal
Procedure scrupulously before conclusion of
the trial or before disposal of the appeal.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
BENCH AT AURANGABAD
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 462 OF 2015
State of Maharashtra V Pappu alias Asraji
S/o Suresh Chavan
CORAM : S.S. SHINDE & K.K. SONAWANE, JJ.
Dated: December 02, 2016
Reissue notice to respondent no.3
in Criminal Appeal no. 832 of 2015,
returnable on 4th January, 2017.
2. The learned A.P.P. appearing for the
appellant/State in Criminal Appeal No. 462 of
2015 assures this Court that he will furnish
the correct and complete address of
respondent no.3 before next date of hearing.
3. In these appeals, the appellants
have taken exception to the judgment and
order dated 05.12.2014 passed by the Special
Judge, MCOC Act, Aurangabad, in Special Case
No.8/2009.
4. The learned trial Judge while
passing the impugned judgment and order of
acquittal, has not adhered to the provisions
of Section 437A of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973. The said Section reads as
under :
“437A. Bail to require accused to
appear before next Appellate Court.
(1) Before conclusion of the trial and
before disposal of the appeal, the
Court trying the offence or the
Appellate Court, as the case may be,
shall require the accused to execute
bail bonds with sureties, to appear
before the higher court as and when
such Court issues notice in respect of
any appeal or petition filed against
the judgment of the respective Court
and such bail bonds shall be in force
for six months.
(2) If such accused fails to appear,
the bond stand forfeited and the
procedure under Section 446 shall
apply.”
5. While hearing the application
seeking leave to appeal filed by the State or
the victim as the case may be challenging the
order of acquittal passed by the trial Court,
we have noticed in many cases that the
mandate of provision of Section 437A of Code
of Criminal Procedure is not scrupulously
followed and it creates difficulties and
hindrances to secure presence of
accused/respondent in appeal preferred before
the higher Court. On careful reading of the
said provision, it is abundantly clear that
before conclusion of the trial and before
disposal of the appeal, the Court trying the
offence or the Appellate Court, as the case
may be, shall require the accused to execute
bail bonds with sureties, to appear before
the higher court as and when such Court
issues notice in respect of any appeal or
petition filed against the judgment of the
respective Court and such bail bonds shall be
in force for six months.
6. In that view of the matter, it is
necessary to bring to the notice of the
learned Judges of the Trial Courts as well as
appellate Courts, dealing with the criminal
matters that they should follow the mandate
of Section 437A of Code of Criminal
Procedure scrupulously before conclusion of
the trial or before disposal of the appeal.
7. The copy of this order passed today
be circulated to all the Judges of the trial
Courts and appellate Courts dealing with
criminal matters in Sessions Courts, so as to
appraise them about the provisions of Section
437A of the Code of Criminal Procedure and
ultimately to follow the mandate of said
section in future. It would facilitate for
expeditious hearing of matters before higher
Court after securing presence of accused.
8. The Registrar (Judicial), High Court
of Judicature of Bombay, Bench at Aurangabad
shall ensure that the copy of this order is
circulated by email or any other fastest
mode of communication to all the District and
Sessions Courts and also trial Courts dealing
with the criminal matters throughout the
State of Maharashtra and ask the Registry to
place on record the report of compliance of
today's order.
9. Hearing of these appeals is deferred
by four weeks.
10. Stand over to 4th January, 2017.
Sd/ Sd/
(K.K. SONAWANE, J.) (S.S. SHINDE, J.)
No comments:
Post a Comment