Investigating Agency Can't Defeat Right Of Statutory Bail By Filing Police Report Without Completing Investigation: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has said that the right to statutory bail of an accused cannot be defeated merely because police report has been filed by the investigating agency even when investigation in the case is incomplete.

“The police has a right to conduct further investigation. However, at the same time, the investigating agency under the garb of further investigation cannot be allowed to file the police report without completion of investigation, only to defeat the right of statutory bail. The basic concept is that to fulfil the provision of Section 167, the charge sheet has to be filed upon completion of investigation,” Justice Dinesh Kumar Sharma observed.

The court said that what is required is completion of the investigation and not mere filing of the police report. It added that merely because the report has been filed and investigation is not completed, it cannot fulfil the basic purpose and intention of the legislature as provided under Section 167 of Cr. P.C.

Justice Sharma added that the investigating agency “in its anxiety of keeping the accused in custody” may take a plea that probe is complete, however, the best judge should be the concerned trial court.

“The Court is the guardian of the rights bestowed upon the accused persons. Strict compliance of the procedure is necessary to protect the fundamental rights of an individual. Merely, filing of the chargesheet, whether incomplete or piecemeal cannot defeat the basic purpose of Section 167 (2) Cr. P.C. The Court at this stage, also cannot be expected to minutely appreciate the evidence, so as to ascertain whether the same is “sufficient evidence or not”,” the court said.

It further said that Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. must be interpretated bearing in mind the three-fold objectives of the legislature i.e. ensuring a fair trial, expeditious investigation as well as trial and establishing a rationalized procedure “that protects the interests of the indigent strata of society.”

“These objects essentially serve as components of the overarching fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India,” Justice Sharma said.

The court made the observations while dismissing CBI’s plea challenging trial court’s order granting default bail to former Dewan Housing Finance Corporation Limited (DHFL) promoters Kapil Wadhawan and his brother Dheeraj in the alleged bank loan scam case.

“The question to be considered is that whether the material evidence having been placed on record by CBI against the present respondents/accused persons is sufficient to conduct the trial in respect of the offences alleged against him. The offence alleged against the accused persons are very serious and very high in magnitude. The material collected by the investigating agency so far, to the mind of this Court falls too short. Rather, if, this report is considered to be a complete investigation qua the accused persons, the investigating agency will suffer a lot,” the court said.

Justice Sharma added that the trial court had rightly made the observation that the time has come when the legislature will have to make certain provisions where period of investigation for serious offences have to be extended, subject to certain limitations and restrictions.

“Thus in the report filed by the investigating agency there should be sufficient evidence to bring home the guilt of the accused. The purpose should not be merely to detain the accused. The purpose is that if an offence has been committed it must reach to its logical end. The detention during investigation or trial cannot be turned into a punitive detention. It is also a settled proposition that further investigation can be conducted only after the investigation is complete,” the court added.

The court concluded that the chargesheet filed by CBI in the matter was an “incomplete or piecemeal chargesheet” and terming it as a final report under section 173(2) of Cr.P.C., “merely to ruse the statutory and fundamental right of default bail to the accused”, shall negate Section 167 of Cr.PC and will also be against Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

“The Constitution of India is a fountainhead of the law of the land and procedures and is a shining light to show and guide us in order to secure the ends of the justice. Part-III of the Constitution of India confers fundamental rights,” the court said.

A coordinate bench had recently observed filing a piece-meal chargesheet to defeat the right of an accused to default bail goes against the mandate of Article 21 of the Constitution.

In April, the Supreme Court had held in Ritu Chhabaria case that incomplete chargesheet cannot defeat the right to statutory bail. Later, the Central Government sought a recall of the judgment. While considering the Centre's recall application, a bench led by CJI directed that courts should defer applications seeking default bail on the basis of Ritu Chhabaria judgment.

Title: CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGTATION v. KAPIL WADHAWAN & ANR.

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 473

Click Here To Read Order