2020 (5) TMI 734 - HC - Indian Laws

Seeking grant of Bail - allegation of idol theft - benefit of Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C - COVID-19 situation - HELD THAT - On considering the antecedent of the accused, crime alleged, abscondance of few more accused persons and non-recovery of the remaining stolen property this court finds that the petitioner does not deserve bail at this juncture. Whether the petitioner is entitle to avail the benefit of Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C? - HELD THAT - Taking note of the Covid-19 situation and realising the gravity of the pandemic, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in IN RE COGNIZANCE FOR EXTENSION OF LIMITATION 2020 (5) TMI 418 - SC ORDER passed order extending the period of limitation to obviate the difficulties faced by the litigants who are supposed to personally come to the court and file their petition/application/suits/in all other proceedings until further orders - No doubt in the above order the Honourable Supreme Court has not specifically mentioned that police investigation should also be covered by the said order. However, the Apex Court while invoking its extraordinary power conferred in Article 142 of the Constitution during an extraordinary circumstances has clearly expressed his intention and reason for passing such order. The order has been passed to obviate the difficulties faced by the litigants across the country in filing their petitions/applications/suits/appeals/ all other proceedings(emphasis added). Therefore it is appropriate for any prudent person to appreciate the order of the Honourable Apex Court in a holistic perspective. Section 167 of Cr.P.C envisages completion of investigation within the period of 60 days or 90 days, as the case may be, depending upon the gravity of the offence and the extent of punishment. If the investigation not completed within period prescribed, the person accused of the offence is entitled for bail as if he has committed bailable offence. Thereafter the Provisions of Chapter XXXIII of the Code will apply. In other words, Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure mandates the investigating agency to complete the investigation within the time prescribed. If they fail to complete the investigation, statutory right blossom to the person in custody to seek release from prison on bail as matter of right. Currently, the State has restricted free movement of the Public. The Law Enforcing Agencies are directed to ensure complete lock down. Access to places restricted either partially or absolutely. Government mechineries has almost come to stand still. Courts gates are locked. Public access is prohibited. All judicial proceedings are conducted through video conference. Administration wings of the Court yet to resume the physical functioning. In such a circumstances, the wings of the investigating agency are clipped; their legs are tied. They are unable to conduct the investigation and complete the same. Even if they complete the investigation, courts are not open to receive it. This is not their fault. Covid-19 situation is the cause for not completing the investigating within the time fixed under the Statute. Violators of law cannot take undue advantage of the extra ordinary situation and enjoy the liberty while the entire nation is under lock down and crippled from carrying on their normal activities - The spirit behind the order of the Apex Court is to do complete justice. Conscious to the fact that there are several legislations prescribing limitation, the Honourable Supreme Court has generally stated the period of limitation prescribed under general law of limitation or under special laws shall be extended until further order. Therefore it is needless to mention that the limitation under Section 167 for investigation also get extended. The petitioner is arrested for the theft of three idols in the temple. One idol has been recovered based on the confession of the co- accused and two idols are yet to be recovered. Out of seven accused four have been arrested and three more are at large. In view of the order passed by the Honourable Supreme Court extending the limitation, the time prescribed for completing investigation under Section 167(2) gets eclipsed. The petitioner cannot harp on the limitation prescribed under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C and pray release on bail. Petition dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
Bail application based on Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. during COVID-19 lockdown.

Analysis:
1. The petitioner sought bail, claiming innocence in an idol theft case pending for 5 years, arrested under Sections 457(2), 380(2), 411(2), and 414(2) of IPC. Petitioner argued for bail under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C due to no final report filed after 92 days in custody.

2. The State opposed bail, citing theft of three idols, one recovered from a relative of the petitioner, with two still missing. Investigation hindered by lockdown, restricting movement and access to witnesses. Petitioner's criminal history and likelihood of absconding or reoffending raised concerns against bail.

3. The Supreme Court's order extended limitation periods for legal proceedings due to COVID-19, affecting physical court filings. The Court deliberated on whether this extension applied to police investigations under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C.

4. Section 167(2) mandates investigation completion within 60/90 days; failure allows default bail. The Court considered the 'default bail' concept and the impact of the Supreme Court's order on limitation periods.

5. Acknowledging the lockdown's impact on investigations, the Court emphasized the Supreme Court's order aimed at ensuring justice amidst pandemic restrictions. Misinterpreting or disregarding the order would lead to injustice and misuse of the situation by offenders.

6. The Court highlighted the equitable nature of the Supreme Court's order under Article 142, binding on all courts. The petitioner's rights under Article 21 subject to due process, not granting unfettered liberty. The order's extension of limitation periods applied to Section 167(2) as well.

7. Considering the ongoing investigation, incomplete recovery of stolen idols, and the Supreme Court's order, the Court dismissed the bail application, emphasizing the impact of the lockdown on investigation timelines and the petitioner's inability to claim default bail under Section 167(2) during the extended limitation period.