IMPORTANT POINT
Right to life and liberty is one of integral part of Constitution of India and it is the most sacred Fundamental Right – Custody of people in name of various enactments and without adhering to promptness of investigation, cannot be sustained.

JUDGMENT

Pankaj Purohit, J.—These are two sets of appeals; in one set, the orders passed by the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani in FIR No.22 of 2024 has been put to challenge, whereas in another set, the order passed by the same Court in FIR No.23 of 2024 has been challenged. However the date of order(s) in all these matters is different. The substance of the said order is that the court has extended the period of investigation and appellants’ detention beyond the period of 90 days. At the same time the order(s) passed by the court of learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani in respect of aforementioned FIR/Crime Numbers 22 and 23 of 2024 have been challenged, whereby the application(s) moved by the appellants for granting them default bail has been turned down. Since the subject matter of all these appeals is one and the same, hence these are being disposed of by this common judgment. But for convenience facts of Criminal Appeal No. 289 of 2024, Gulzar Vs. State of Uttarakhand are being considered.

2. These criminal appeals have been filed under Section 21(4) of National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 against the order dated 11.05.2024, passed by learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani in FIR No.22 of 2024, whereby the learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani has extended the period of investigation and detention of the appellants beyond 90 days as well as the order dated 24.05.2024, passed by learned Ist Additional Sessions Judge, Haldwani in Bail Application Nos.122 and 129 of 2024, whereby the bail applications of the appellants for release on default bail have been rejected.

3. Facts of the case giving rise to the present proceedings are that an FIR No.22 of 2024 dated 08.02.2024 was lodged in Police Station Banbhoolpura, District Nainital under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 332, 353, 395, 427, 435 IPC, Section 25 of Arms Act, 1959, Sections 3 and 4 of Uttarakhand Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 2003 and under Section 7 of Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1932 was lodged against unknown persons. Another FIR No.23 of 2024 was also registered in Police Station Banbhoolpura on 09.02.2024 under Sections 147, 148, 149, 120-B, 307, 332, 353, 427, 435 IPC and Sections 3 and 4 of Uttarakhand Prevention of Damage to Public Property Act, 2003 against Mehboob Alam, Shakil Ahmed and other unknown persons.

4. As per the aforesaid FIR, on 08.02.2024 officials from Nagar Nigam, Tehsil and Police went to a place in Banbhoolpura locality to demolish two structures allegedly encroachments on public land – one Madarsa and one Mosque, which was already sealed and fenced. When officials reached the spot they faced resistance from the local public, who formed a mob and started pelting stones at the officials and petrol bombs were also thrown in the process. During this process Police officials also rush to the Police Station Banbhoolpura after receiving of reports that some persons attempted to set the police station on fire; petrol bombs were thrown on the Police vehicle and the service pistols and cartridges of Police officials S.O. Mukhani were also snatched. The appellants were arrested during investigation in a period of two days i.e., on 11.02.2024 and 13.02.2024.

5. Under the provisions of CrPC under Section 167(2)(a)(i) the maximum period of detention of under trial is 90 days. According to the provisions of Section 167 CrPC if the investigation of a case as given in the provision of Section 167(2)(a)(i) is not completed within 90 days, the accused persons shall be entitled to get default bail under the said provisions of CrPC. The period of 90 days was going to expire on 12.05.2024 and 13.05.2024 respectively. In respect of the appellants, on 09.05.2024 the offence under Section 15/16 of The Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as “U.A.P.A. Act, 1967”) were added. By virtue of adding the provisions of the U.A.P.A. Act, 1967 the provisions of Section 43D are invoke