The single judge bench of Justice Alok Kumar Verma of the Uttarakhand High Court held that Section 41 and Section 41A of the Code are facets of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Brief facts
The present application was filed for the grant of regular bail in the case registered under Sections 406, 420, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3 of the Uttarakhand Protection of Interests of Depositors (In Financial Establishments) Act, 2005.
Contentions of the Applicant
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the applicant contended that she has been falsely implicated in the present case and she is a permanent resident of District Pithoragarh, therefore, there is no likelihood of her absconding. Furthermore, it was contended that there has been a violation of Section 41 and Section 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Observations of the court
The Hon’ble Court observed that Article 21 of the Constitution of India is reflected in Sections 41 and 41A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the Code). The Investigating Agencies and their Officers have an obligation to comply with Sections 41 and 41A of the Code. It is true that the applicant was not provided with notice as required by Section 41A of the Code.
The court relied upon the judgment titled Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another in which it was held that any arrest which is made by not complying with Section 41 and Section 41A of the Code would entitle the accused to bail.
Based on these considerations, the court granted bail to the accused.
The decision of the court
With the above direction, the court allowed the bail application
Case Title: Smt. Tanuja Joshi Vs State of Uttarakhand
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Alok Kumar Verma
Case No.: FIRST BAIL APPLICATION NO.1784 of 2023
Advocate for the Applicant: Mr. Amit Kapri, Advocate.
Advocate for the State: Mr. Pramod Tiwari, Brief Holder.
Read Judgment @Order:
Picture Source :
