The Supreme Court Today (Aug 21) directed the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to respond to a default bail plea by one of the men accused in the Praveen Nettaru murder case. A Bench of Justices MM Sundresh and Aravind Kumar issued notice on an appeal by one Mohammed Jabir (an accused) against a Karnataka High Court order rejecting his default bail plea.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to subscribe!
The Supreme Court on Wednesday directed the National Investigation Agency (NIA) to respond to a default bail plea filed by Mohammed Jabir, one of the accused in the Praveen Nettaru murder case.
The case is being overseen by a Bench comprising Justices MM Sundresh and Aravind Kumar, who issued a notice regarding Jabir’s appeal against a Karnataka High Court order that had previously rejected his default bail plea.
Significantly, the Supreme Court also indicated that it intends to examine whether an oral request for extending an investigation agency’s custody of an accused under the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) can be accepted in the absence of a formal written application.
Senior Advocate Dr. Aditya Sondhi, along with advocate Talha Abdul Rahman, represented the accused in this matter.
The case revolves around the murder of Praveen Nettaru, a worker of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) and a member of its Yuva Morcha (youth wing). Nettaru was murdered in Karnataka in 2022, and the investigation was eventually transferred to the NIA following directions from the Union Home Ministry.
A critical aspect of the case is that the NIA failed to submit a chargesheet within the stipulated 90-day period from the date of the accused’s production before the court, with the deadline expiring on February 6, 2023.
When the trial court took up the case on February 7, 2023, the accused did not immediately assert his right to default bail, which is granted when an investigation agency fails to complete its probe and file a chargesheet within the prescribed time.
On that day, the NIA also did not file a chargesheet, but a junior counsel representing the agency made an oral request for an extension of time and custody.
On the following day, February 8, 2023, both the accused and the NIA submitted formal applications. The NIA filed its application in the morning, seeking an extension of time to file a chargesheet and to prolong the custody period. Later that afternoon, the accused filed a default bail plea.
The trial court decided in favor of the NIA, granting their request for an extension and rejecting the default bail petition filed by the accused. The Karnataka High Court upheld the trial court’s decision on March 12, 2024.
In its ruling, the High Court found it challenging to accept the accused’s argument that custody cannot be extended based merely on an oral request by the NIA. The High Court observed,
“There is no bar as such in Section 167 of Cr.P.C for an oral request being made seeking extension of custody period. If the accused does not avail his right to be released on bail after expiry of the prescribed period to file charge sheet, obviously the court has to extend the custody period. The accused cannot be left in lurch. Oral request for extension is also permitted.”
Furthermore, the High Court supported the trial court’s approach of hearing the default bail and custody extension applications together, affirming that this was the correct procedure in such cases.
CASE TITLE:
[Mohammed Jabir v. National Investigation Agency]
Click Here to Read Previous Reports on BJP
FOLLOW US ON YOUTUBE FOR MORE LEGAL UPDATES
