Code of Criminal Procedure [V of 1898]
Sections 497 and 498 read with
Money Laundering Prevention Act [V of 2012]
Section 13 read with
Criminal Law (Amendment) Act [XL of 1958]
Section 4(2)
Whether before taking cognizance of any offence by a competent Court having jurisdiction to try a case relating thereto filed under the Anti-Corruption Commission Act, 2004 (hereinafter referred to as the Act of 2004), in particular, under the Money Laundering Prevention Act, 2012 (in short, the Act of 2012), the Magistrate or any other Court having no jurisdiction to take cognizance thereof has got any authority to entertain and dispose of an application for bail.
The High Court Division held that while dealing with an application for bail, the Magistrate or the Court concerned will consider the materials furnished by the prosecution only and by considering those materials furnished by the prosecution, the Magistrate or the Court at his or its discretion may grant or refuse bail to the accused. At this juncture, the High Court Division feels tempted to reiterate that it is a settled proposition of law that the defence plea can only be raised and gone into at the time of trial of the case. This is essentially a matter of evidence and trial. Before conclusion of the trial of the case, the veracity of the defence plea can not be ascertained. At the pretrial stage, the defence plea can not be taken into account at any rate. But if a Judge or a Metropolitan/Judicial Magistrate does so, that will amount to begging the question. So this exercise is deprecated. The State -Vs.- M. Wahidul Haque and others (Criminal) 2019 ALR (HCD) Online 42 ....View Full Judgment

Code of Criminal Procedure [V of 1898]
Sections 497 and 498 read with
Money Laundering Prevention Act [V of 2012]
Section 13 read with
Criminal Law (Amendment) Act [XL of 1958]
Section 4(2)
The High Court Division further held that there is no express or implied provision within the four corners of the Act of 2012 debarring or prohibiting the Metropolitan or Judicial Magistracy from entertaining and dealing with any application for bail or remand at the pretrial stage, the Magistracy is well-authorized to entertain and deal therewith in accordance with the above-mentioned provisions of the Code. To sum up, at the pretrial stage, that is to say, from the date of lodgment of the FIR with the concerned Police Station till taking cognizance of the offence by the Senior Special Judge under section 4(2) of the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act, 1958, the Judicial or Metropolitan Magistracy is empowered to entertain, deal with and dispose of any application for bail of an accused in a case under the Act of 2012 under section 497 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Similarly at the pretrial stage, in the absence of any express or implied prohibition in any other special law, the Metropolitan or Judicial Magistracy may entertain, deal with and dispose of any application for bail of an accused under section 497 of the Code. In case of rejection of his application for bail, he may move the Court of Session by filing a Criminal Miscellaneous Case under section 498 and thereafter in case of failure before the Court of Session, he can move the High Court Division under the self-same section 498 of the aforesaid Code for bail. In this connection, it is to be remembered that the powers of granting bail of the Court of Session and the High Court Division under section 498 of the Code are concurrent. Again after taking cognizance of any offence punishable under the Act of 2012, if an accused files an application for bail, then the Senior Special Judge/Special Judge concerned will hear and dis¬pose of the same in accordance with the provisions of section 13 of the Act of 2012. In case of refusal of bail by the Senior Special Judge or the Special Judge, as the case may be, the accused may prefer an appeal there against before the High Court Division under section 22 of the Act of 2012. The State -Vs.- M. Wahidul Haque and others (Criminal) 2019 ALR (HCD) Online 42 ....View Full Judgment