Latest News
Back
Supreme Court Declares Accused Entitled To Bail Even When Charge Sheet Returned Due To Technical Reasons; Remand Period Cannot Be Extended Beyond 90 Days
On Monday, a two judge bench of the Supreme Court, comprising of Justice AM Sapre and UU Lalit, held that under Section 167(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure,an accused is entitled to a default bail, even if the charge sheet, filed by police, was returned by the Magistrate for technical reasons. The bench, while examining the correctness of order and judgement dated 23.07.2018 passed by the High Court of Judicature for Rajasthan Bench at Jaipur in SBCRMB No.9035 of 2018, also held that no provision of the Code empowers anyone to extend the period within which the investigation must be completed nor does it admit of any such eventuality.
FACTS:
The appellants, arrested on 08.04.2018 and remanded in police/magisterial custody from time to time, were accused in a case registered under Sections punishable under Sections 143, 302, 323, 336, 341, 452 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code against 18 persons. Later, the complainant approached the High Court and filed a petition demanding fair and impartial investigation in the matter, in which an order came to be passed by the High Court on 03.07.2018.
Since the appellants were in the custody since 08.04.2018, the investigation, in terms of Section 167 of CrPC had to be completed by 07.07.2018. On 05.07.2018 a report was filed by the policebefore the concerned Judicial Magistrate, under Section 173 of the Code, butsince said report was filed by a police officer having a lower rank than an ASP, contrary to the order passed by the HC, an application was filed by the complainant. The charge sheet along with the certified copy of the order dated 03.07.2018 was returned to the police by the Magistrate, due to which on the expiry of 90th day i.e. on 07.07.2018, no report under Section 173 of the Code was on record with the Magistrate.
A bail application was then filed by the appellants after the expiry of 90 days under the provisions of Section 167(2) of the Code. The plea was rejected by the Judicial Magistrate on the grounds that the charge-sheet was returned due to technical fault and the effect of the order dated 03.07.2018, passed by the High Court, was an extension of the period within which the investigation could be completed.
ISSUES BEFORE THE SC:
- Whether the investigation can be considered as complete for the purposes of Section 167(2) of the Code so as to deny the benefit to the accused in terms of said provision;
- Whether the order passed by the HC could be construed as one under which the period for completing the investigation was extended or not?
Accepting the arguments of Advocate Sidhartha Dave, the bench observed that as there were no papers or the charge-sheet on the 90th day for the concerned Magistrate to assess the situation whether on merits the accused was required to be further remanded into custody.
The Bench held that the provision of the Code does not empower anyone to extend the completion period of the investigation nor does it admit of any such eventuality.It was also held that there would be no prohibition for arrest or re-arrest of the appellants on cogent grounds and in such eventuality, the appellants will be entitled to petition for grant of regular bail.
