All the four appeals are on certificate of fitness granted by the High Court.
He was arrested in companynection with the sessions cases on December 19, 1969 and was in detention on remand from December 21, 1969 to April 9, 1972.
1870 of 1976 made by N.V. Krishnaiah.
From the Judgment and Order dated 6 7 1976 of the Andhra Pradesh High Court in Writ Petition Nos.
The petitioner further claimed that had he been free at the time when the F.I.R. was lodged on Decem ber 18, 1969, he would have surrendered immediately and would have been produced before the companyrt for remand on the next day as some of the companyaccused in the case had been it was submitted that if the companycerned authority who companyld but did number take immediate and necessary steps to produce the petitioner before the magistrate, the petition er should number be made to suffer.
He also preferred an appeal to the High Court against the order of companyviction.
dismissed by the High Court on November 28, 1975.
The relevant facts are as follows.
The detention order under the preventive detention law was revoked by the State Gov ernment on April 11, 1970 and Rao was released on the next day, April 12.
The High Court dismissed the appeal on November 28, 1975.
The writ petitioners have also filed appeals against the part of the.
The High Court granted him bail and he was released on bail on April 29, 1972.
484/76 and respondent in Crl.
485 and respondent in appeal No.
He was also companyvicted by the Addi tional Sessions Judge on April 10, 1972 and the maximum sentence in his case too was rigorous imprisonment for four years.
Criminal Appeals Nos.
was companyvicted along with others and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment for the offences charged against him the maximum sentence was rigorous imprisonment for four years.
It was also companytended that the warrant issued by the Additional Sessions judge on December 1, 1975 should have been served on him immediately, that it was numberfault of his that the companycerned authority chose to serve the warrant on December 30, 1975, and that during this period of one month he should be deemed to have been serving the sentence imposed on him.,
His appeal against the order of companyviction was.
He was arrested under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act, 1971 on June 26, 1975.
A warrant of arrest issued by the AdditionalSessions Judge on December 1, 1975 was served on him on December 30, 1975, on which date the detention order under the Maintenance of Internal Security Act was also revoked.
1865, 1870 of 1976 respectively.
419 is from writ petition No.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeals Nos.
Judgment disallowing their prayer for set off under section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
On these Krishnaiah in his writ petition sought an order on the State of Andhra Pradesh to treat the period from June 26 1975 to November 28, 1975 as remand period and to set off under section 428 of the Code of Criminal Proce dure this period during which he was under preventive deten tion, against the term of imprisonment imposed on him on companyviction in the sessions cases.
On April 10, 1972 Rao.
418 419 and 484 485/76.
Parmeswara Rao, G. Narayana Rao and A. K. Ganguli, for the appellants in Crl.
He filed writ petition 1865 of 1976 asking for an order on the Government of Andhra Pradesh to set off under section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the time between December 19, 1969 and April 13, 1970 against his term of imprisonment treating the said period as the period of detention undergone by him as undertrial prisoner, and to take into account the entire period during which he was in detention for the purpose of remission of his sentence under the Prisons Act.
418/76.
106 of 1970 and 6 of 1971 on the of the Additional Sessions Judge, Hyderabad.
484 485/76.
A. No.
A.V. Rao, appel lant in appeal 484 of 1976 and respondent in appeal 418 of 1976, was in detention under the Preventive Detention Act when on December 18, 1969 a first information report was filed naming him among others as an accused in a case involving offences under section 121A and 120B read with section 395, and section 120B read with section 447 of the Indian Penal Code, which gave rise to sessions cases Nos.
A. No.
419/76.
The High Court rejected the petition ers prayer for setting off under section 428 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 the periods during which they were in preventive detention against the term of imprisonment imposed on them on their companyviction in a sessions trial, but accepted their companytention that they were entitled to the benefit of the remission system under the Prisons Act, 1894 for the period during which they were in jail as under trial prisoners before their companyviction Criminal Ap peals Nos.
418 arises out of writ petition No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by GUPTA, J. These are a group of four appeals from a companymon Judgment of the Andhra Pradesh High Court partly allowing two writ petitions, writ petition No.
1865 of 1976 filed by A.V. Rao and Appeal No.
Appeals Nos.
Lakshminarasu, for the appellant in Crl.
A. No.
1870 of 1976 made by N.V. Krishnaiah.
Appeal No.
485/76 and for respondent in Crl.
K. Jain, fox the appellant in Crl.
418 and 419 of 1976 by State of Andhra Pradesh are directed against the part of the High Courts Judgment granting the writ petitioners the benefit of the remission system under the Prisons Act treating for this purpose the period of undertrial detention on the same footing as a term of imprisonment on companyviction.
1865 of 1976 filed by A.V. Rao, and writ petition No.
484 and 485 of 1976 are by V. Rao and N.V. Krishnaiah respectively.
The sentences were directed to run company currently.
The facts of N.V. Krishnaiahs case are similar.
He was then produced before the magistrate in companynection with the sessions cases on April 13, 1970 there is some doubt about this date because the record at some places mentions the date as April 18, but the discrepancy is number of any significance on the questions arising for decision in these appeals.
Krish naiah, appellant in appeal No.
Appeals Nos.
419, was also an accused in the sessions cases 106 of 1970 and 6 of 1971 with A.V. Rao and others.
A. No.
418 419/76 and respondents in Crl.
lie however was number in detention when the F.I.R. was lodged.
