1995 (2) TMI 478 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues:
Computation of the period of 90 days for compulsive bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Entertainment of bail petition after the challan was filed.

Analysis:

1. The judgment deals with the interpretation of Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure regarding the period for compulsive bail. The High Court granted bail to the Accused-Respondents based on the expiry of 90 days from the date of their detention and the non-filing of the challan within that period. The Supreme Court noted that the High Court erred in computing the 90-day period. The Court clarified that the 90-day period should exclude one day on either side, as per Sections 9 and 10 of the General Clauses Act. In this case, the 90th day coincided with the date the challan was filed, indicating that the High Court's computation was incorrect.

2. Another issue addressed in the judgment is the timing of entertaining a bail petition after the challan is filed. The Supreme Court referred to the Sanjay Dutt case and emphasized that the right to compulsive bail must be examined on the date the court considers the bail application, not merely on the date of petition filing. In this case, when the High Court entertained the bail petition and granted bail to the Accused-Respondents, the challan had already been filed. Therefore, the Court concluded that the right to compulsive bail was not available at that time.

3. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, overturning the High Court's order granting bail to the Accused-Respondents. The matter was remitted back to the High Court for reconsideration of the bail application on its merits. The Accused-Respondents were granted bail for four weeks from the date of the judgment. The High Court was instructed to inform the Accused-Respondents to present their bail application if desired and to act according to the High Court's decision.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court clarified the computation of the 90-day period for compulsive bail and emphasized the importance of examining the availability of the right to bail at the time of the court's consideration. The judgment highlights the significance of adhering to procedural requirements and legal principles in granting bail in criminal cases.