Table of Contents
Arvind Kejriwal bail plea in CBI case: LIVE FROM Supreme Court
This is a truism, a courtroom arrest can never satisfy Sections 41 and 41A. .. Even while dealing with Section 41 or 41A, there is no endeavor made by the CBI to do so. . Now he says that this court reads it to pre-empt the mandatory amendments. It is recognized today that as long as there is production warrant, Section 41 and 41A is not necessary to be enforced. . This is error apparent on the face and therefore SKU cannot be ported to the fresh new entity under the existing law. It is like the day before yesterday has become today or in simple terms 2 + 2 = 5. It is very important to stress that there is no inadvertence or oversight in the whole marked up text.
A courtroom arrest can never constitute Sections 41 and 41A in any way at all. .. In CBI’s equation, there is no effort being made to even glance at Section 41 or 41A. . Now he says that this court reads it to supplant those mandatory amendments. Now it is believed that if there is production warrant available then there is no need for Section 41 and 41A to be complied. . This should be basic error apparent on the face! Dr, Law stretching a truth is like putting black and white together, we get gray but instead we get more than the whole. As such there is no inadvertience or oversight.
One might add the fact that Arvind Kejriwal chose to dodge some questions and remained noncommittal to quite a few others. CBI which should be keen on investigating cases involving the commission of the CrPC is obsessed with everything else. Section 41A is a little important or rather a weaker section of the proposal in terms of assuming importance in drafting the proposal. . He (ASG) said that there is no requirement of section 41A since the person is already in judicial custody. It is assumed that no statute can be given a construction which will be against the statute. .. especially criminal law statute. .. Your Lordships would be implied putting a proviso or amending the statue (if that argument is accepted). Now like Alice in wonderland it gets more curious
The above should apply to Sections 41 and 41A. .. Section 41 is the first of the stages, where one cannot arrest, in case the offence has a term of no more than 7 years. . I find it very hard to believe that 1952 Supreme Court judgement can be quoted when there were no Sections 41 and 41A. . As much as no one wants to be taken to the cleaners there has to be some fairness. . How can it even be cited Let alone be utilised for the achievement of high standards of educational goals as we shall see later as we make reference to some of these sources.
