2020 Supreme(SC) 417

SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Ashok Bhushan, M.R. Shah, V. Ramasubramanian, JJ.
S.KASI – APPELLANT(S)
VERSUS
STATE THROUGH THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE SAMAYNALLUR POLICE STATION MADURAI DISTRICT – RESPONDENT(S)
Criminal Appeal No. 452 of 2020 (Arising out of SLP (CRL.) No. 2433 of 2020)
Decided on : 19-06-2020

IMPORTANT POINTS
(1) Law of limitation bars remedy but not right.
(2) Provisions of Section 167 of Code of Criminal Procedure gives due regard to personal liberty of a person – Without submission of charge-sheet within 60 days or 90 days as may be applicable, accused cannot be detained by Police.
(3) Restrictions which have been imposed during lockdown announced by Government shall not operate as any restriction on rights of accused as protected by Section 167(2) regarding his indefeasible right to get default bail on non-submission of charge-sheet within time prescribed.
(4) A Bench whether coordinate or Larger, has to refrain from making any uncharitable observation on a decision even though delivered by a Bench of a lesser coram.

Headnote:

(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 167(2) – Default bail – Non-submission of charge-sheet within prescribed period – Section 57 of Code of Criminal Procedure contains embargo on Police Officers to detain in custody a person arrested beyond 24 hours – Object is that accused should be brought before Magistrate without delay within 24 hours, which provision is in consonance with constitutional mandate engrafted under Article 22(2) of Constitution – Provision of Section 167 is supplementary to Section 57 – Power under Section 167 is given to detain a person in custody while police goes on with investigation – Section 167 is a provision which authorises Magistrate permitting detention of accused in custody prescribing maximum period – Debate on Section 167 must also be looked at from perspective of expeditious conclusion of investigation and from angle of personal liberty – Provisions of Section 167 of Code of Criminal Procedure gives due regard to personal liberty of a person – Without submission of charge-sheet within 60 days or 90 days as may be applicable, accused cannot be detained by Police – Provision gives due recognition to personal liberty. (Paras 11, 12 and 14)

(B) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 167(2) read with Section 57 – Default bail – Non-submission of charge-sheet within prescribed period – Law of limitation bars remedy but not right – When this Court passed order for extending limitation for filing petitions/ applications/ suits/ appeals/all other proceedings, order was for benefit of those who have to take remedy, whose remedy may be barred by time because they were unable to come physically to file such proceedings – Neither this Court in its order dated 23.03.2020 can be held to have eclipsed time prescribed under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. nor restrictions which have been imposed during lockdown announced by Government shall operate as any restriction on rights of accused as protected by Section 167(2) regarding his indefeasible right to get default bail on non-submission of charge-sheet within time prescribed – Order dated 23.03.2020 cannot be read to mean that it ever intended to extend period of filing charge-sheet by police as contemplated under Section 167(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure – Investigating Officer could have submitted/filed charge-sheet before (Incharge) Magistrate – Even during lockdown and as has been done in so many cases charge-sheet could have been filed/submitted before Magistrate (Incharge) and Investigating Officer was not precluded from filing/submitting charge-sheet even within stipulated period before Magistrate (Incharge) – Provision of Section 57 as well as Section 167 are supplementary to each other – Order of this Court dated 23.03.2020 never meant to curtail any provision of Code of Criminal Procedure or any other statute which was enacted to protect Personal Liberty of a person – Right of prosecution to file a charge-sheet even after a period of 60 days/ 90 days is not barred – Prosecution can very well file charge-sheet after 60 days/90 days but without filing charge-sheet they cannot detain an accused beyond said period when accused prays to court to set him at liberty due to non-filing of charge-sheet within period prescribed – Right of prosecution to carry on investigation and submit charge-sheet is not akin to right of liberty of a person enshrined under Article 21 and reflected in other statutes including Section 167, Cr.P.C. (Paras 17, 18 and 26)

(C) Judicial Discipline – A coordinate Bench cannot take a contrary view – In event there was any doubt, a coordinate Bench only can refer the matter for consideration by a Larger Bench – Judicial discipline ordains so – All Courts including High Courts and Supreme Court have to follow a principle of Comity of Courts – A Bench whether coordinate or Larger, has to refrain from making any uncharitable observation on a decision even though delivered by a Bench of a lesser coram – A Bench sitting in a Larger coram may be right in overturning a judgment on a question of law, which jurisdiction a Judge sitting in a coordinate Bench does not have – In any case, a Judge sitting in a coordinate Bench or a Larger Bench has no business to make any adverse comment or uncharitable remark on any other judgment. (Paras 31 and 33)

Facts of the case:

Present appeal has been filed questioning judgment of Madurai Bench of Madras High Court by which judgment the bail application of appellant has been dismissed. Only issue which need to be decided in this appeal is as to whether appellant due to non-submission of charge sheet within the prescribed period by the prosecution was entitled for grant of bail as per Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Findings of the Court:

A Bench whether coordinate or Larger, has to refrain from making any uncharitable observation on a decision even though delivered by a Bench of a lesser coram. A Bench sitting in a Larger coram may be right in overturning a judgment on a question of law, which jurisdiction a Judge sitting in a coordinate Bench does not have. In any case, a Judge sitting in a coordinate Bench or a Larger Bench has no business to make any adverse comment or uncharitable remark on any other judgment.

Result : Appeal allowed.