Right To Default Bail Not Extinguished With 'Simultaneous' Filing Of Chargesheet: Madras High Court

In a pertinent ruling, the Madurai Bench of Madras High Court has delved deep into the statutory provisions and precedents that determine the four corners of default bail under Section 167(2) of CrPC and Section 36(A)(4) of NDPS Act.Thereby, the court has clarified the long-standing confusion about the time constraints applicable to the accused for availing the right to default bail and to the investigating agency for filing of charge sheet before the court. Justice K. Murali Shankar has held that subsequent or even simultaneous filing of the charge sheet does not disentitle an accused from claiming default bail under CrPC.The Bench observed that there is a misconception that in cases where the bail petition under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C and the charge sheet are being filed on the same day, then the time at which, bail petition or the charge sheet is filed, is the deciding factor and that if the charge sheet is filed earlier to the bail petition, then the accused is not entitled to get the statutory bail or in case, if the bail petition is filed before laying of charge sheet, then the bail application has to be allowed.It is made clear that the investigating agency has to file the charge sheet "before" the expiry of 60 days, 90 days (mentioned in CrPC) or 180 days (mentioned in NDPS Act) as the case may be, if they require the detention of the accused beyond the prescribed period of 60 or 90 or 180 days.The Court observed,"If the charge sheet is filed on 61st or 91st or 181st day, as the case may be, even prior to the filing of the bail petition on the same day, the said filing of the charge sheet will not defeat the right already accrued to the accused and if such an interpretation is not given, then that will lead to a proposition that the investigating agency can file a charge sheet even on 61st or 91st or 181st day as the case may be, as of right and detain the accused in judicial custody."BackgroundThe petitioner in this case is an accused under the NDPS Act. His application for default bail was dismissed by the trial court, considering the seriousness, gravity of the offence, serious objections on prosecution side and huge quantity of the contraband. It had also noted that the charge sheet was filed on the same day as the application for default bail, but the former was filed by the investigating agency before in time.Right Of Accused To Statutory Bail & Effect Of Prosecution Filing Chargesheet Simultaneously Relying primarily on M. Raveendran v. The Intelligence Officer, Director of Revenue Intelligence, and Bikramjit Singh v. State of Punjab, the High Court underscored that if there arises any ambiguity with regards to the construction of substantive penal statutes and procedural law, the interpretation that leans towards the protection of the rights of the accused. This approach is in light of "the ubiquitous power disparity between the individual accused and the State machinery'. While interpreting the procedural law, there must be some reasonable time limit, be it under the Criminal Procedural Code or the specific provisions under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, enabling the accused to apply for statutory bail upon the expiry of a period of time, the court observed. "In Tamil Nadu, all the Courts shall ordinarily sit at 10.30.am. If the investigating agency files the charge sheet by 10.30 am, on the next day, after the expiry of the period prescribed under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C, can we say that the accused has lost his right of filing the petition for default bail subsequently, on the same day? In my considered view, the accused can exercise his right to apply the default bail on the whole day, on which, the indefeasible right to apply the statutory bail accrues to him", the court lays down in the order. The court also made it clear that when the investigating agency files the charge sheet after expiry of the said period, but the accused also invokes the right to default bail simultaneously, the time of filing the charge sheet cannot be considered as a relevant criterion for deciding the statutory bail. In Sanjay Dutt v. State Through C.B.I., (1994) 5 SCC 410, the apex court had held that the accused must apply for statutory bail under Section 167(2) CrPC the moment such right accrues. According to the 1994 judgment, if the accused fails to do so, the said right cannot be claimed at a subsequent stage of the proceedings after the prosecution has filed a charge sheet or additional complaint. About the precautionary principle laid down in the Sanjay Dutt case, the court clarified: "…Supreme Court in M.Ravindran's case, cited supra, has held that the Constitution Bench decision in Sanjay Dutt's case cannot be interpreted so as to mean that even where the accused has promptly exercised his right under Section 167(2) and indicated his willingness to furnish bail, he can be denied bail on account of delay in ...

Right To Default Bail Not Extinguished With 'Simultaneous' Filing Of Chargesheet: Madras High Court

Sebin James

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sebin James

Right To Default Bail Not Extinguished With 'Simultaneous' Filing Of Chargesheet: Madras High Court

Sebin James

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Sebin James

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers