9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (7) TMI 832 - HC - Indian LawsSeeking grant of default bail - whether the date of remand of the accused be excluded from computation of period of 90 days, as envisaged under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C.? - HELD THAT - In the case of SADHWI PRAGYNA SINGH THAKUR VERSUS STATE OF MAHARASHTRA 2011 (9) TMI 1078 - SUPREME COURT , it was observed that the relevant date of counting 90 days for filing the charge-sheet is the date of first order of remand and not the date of arrest. In SANJAY DUTT VERSUS STATE THRU. C.B.I. BOMBAY 1994 (9) TMI 351 - SUPREME COURT , the Constitution Bench considered the provisions of Section 167 of Cr. PC and Section 20 of TADA Act and it was held that the indefeasibly right accruing to the accused in such situation is enforceable only prior to filing of the challan and it does not survive or remain enforceable on the challan being filed, if already not availed of. Thus, consistently, it has been held that the detention is authorised from the date of remand and therefore, the period of 60 days or 90 days starts running from the date of the order of the remand. The date of remand has not been excluded in those decisions. The applicant was arrested and remanded to custody on 26th February 2020. The applicant was in custody from the date of first remand for a period of 4 days in the month of February (since February consisted of 29 days this year), 31 days in March, 30 days in April. 90 days were completed on 25th May, 2020. Application for default bail was preferred on 26th May, 2020 being 91st day, at 10.35 a.m. The Court called for report from the office and IO on the 26th May, 2020. The note put up by Office Superintendent indicate that after filling the application charge-sheet is received and it is under scrutiny and registration. It is not clear from the order as to when the cognizance was taken. Be that as it may application was prior in point of time. Hence the right under Section 167(2) of the Code had accrued in favour of applicant. The applicant is entitled for bail in accordance with aforesaid provision. The applicant is directed to be released on bail, registered with Navghar Police Station, in accordance with Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. On executing P.R. Bond in the sum of Rs. 50,000/- with one or more sureties in the like amount - bail application allowed.
Issues Involved:
1. Whether the date of remand of the accused should be excluded from the computation of the 90-day period under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. 2. Whether the applicant is entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. 3. Interpretation and application of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and relevant case laws. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Exclusion of the Date of Remand: The primary issue addressed was whether the date of remand should be excluded when computing the 90-day period under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. The applicant was arrested and produced before the Magistrate on 26th February 2020. The learned Additional Sessions Judge excluded the date of remand, concluding that the 90th day fell on 26th May 2020, making the application for default bail on 26th May 2020 premature. The court examined various precedents, including Chhaganti Satyanarayana & Ors. Vs. State of Andhra Pradesh, which held that the period of 90 days begins from the date of the remand order, not the date of arrest. The court also referenced CBI Vs. Anupam Kulkarni, which supported this interpretation, stating that the period of 90 days should be computed from the date of remand, not from the date of arrest. 2. Entitlement to Default Bail: The applicant claimed entitlement to default bail under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C., arguing that the 90-day period ended on 25th May 2020, and since the charge-sheet was not filed by then, the application filed on 26th May 2020 was valid. The court noted that the right to default bail accrues if the charge-sheet is not filed within the stipulated period. The court found that the applicant's application for bail was filed on the 91st day, and the charge-sheet was received later on the same day, making the applicant eligible for default bail. 3. Interpretation and Application of Section 167 of Cr.P.C.: The court delved into the historical context and legislative intent behind Section 167 of Cr.P.C. It highlighted that the provision aims to ensure that the investigation is completed promptly and to prevent indefinite detention of the accused. The court referred to several judgments, including the decision in Uday Mohanlal Acharya Vs. State of Maharashtra, which emphasized the mandatory nature of the 90-day period for filing the charge-sheet and the right to bail upon its expiry. The court also addressed the applicability of Section 9 and 10 of the General Clauses Act, concluding that these provisions do not apply to the computation of the 90-day period under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. Conclusion: The court concluded that the period under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. should be computed from the date of remand, including the first day of remand. The applicant's right to default bail accrued on the 90th day, i.e., 25th May 2020, and the application for bail filed on 26th May 2020 was valid. The applicant was entitled to be released on bail as per Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. The order directed the applicant to be released on bail upon executing a P.R. Bond and fulfilling certain conditions, such as attending the police station monthly and not leaving India without permission.
|
