JUDGMENT

O.P. Dwivedi, J.— This is a petition under Section 439(2) read with Section 482, Cr.P.C. for cancellation of bail granted to the respondents in FIR No. 118/2003, under Sections 498-A/304B/406/34, IPC, P.S. Inderpuri, Delhi.

2. Vide impugned order dated 27-8-2003, learned ASJ has granted bail to the respondents under the proviso (a)(ii) to Section 167(2), Cr.P.C. being of the view that for an offence under Section 304B, IPC the Magistrate can authorise detention during investigation only for a period of sixty days.

3. Admittedly, challan in this case was not filed within a period of sixty days from the date of arrest of the respondent. The only point canvassed before me by the learned Counsel for the State is that in case of State of Maharashtra v. Ketan Seth1 and in case of State of H.P. v. Lal Singh2, view taken by the respective High Courts is that if for the alleged offence the accused can be convicted for more than ten years the period of detention would be 90 days as provided in proviso (a)(i) to section 167(2), Cr.P.C. Earlier in the case of GPS Rana v. The State (NCT of Delhi)3, decided on 1.11.2002, I have taken the view that in cases where punishment could be