IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS JURISDICTION [CIRCUIT BENCH AT JALPAIGURI]
ARIJIT BANERJEE, ANIRUDDHA ROY, JJ.
Sanjay Kumar – Appellants
Versus
The State of West Bengal – Respondent
CRM 160 OF 2021 With IA: CRAN 2 of 2021
Decided on : 09-02-2022
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 21(c) and 36-A(4) - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 439 - Contraband substances - Possession - Recovered - Charged - Seek bail - Held, Any extension of time that prosecution may intend to obtain in terms of provisions to Section 36-A(4) of NDPS Act must be so obtained prior to aforesaid indefeasible right accruing in favour of accused - Once right to obtain bail accrues in the favour of accused he may exercise same at any time prior to filing of charge sheet - Such an application could not in any manner adversely affect right of accused to obtain bail - An application filed by prosecution for custodial investigation must necessarily be filed prior to expiry of the initial period prescribed by NDPS Act - Application for extension of time for custodial investigation cannot be allowed - CRM with IA: stand allowed.
JUDGMENT :
1. This is an application for bail filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.).
Charges:-
2. The charge is under Section 21(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the NDPS Act”) in connection with Special Case No.4 of 2021 arising out of Bhaktinagar P.S. Case No. 77 of 2020 dated January 28, 2020 now pending before the Learned Judge, Special Court under NDPS Act-cum- Additional Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Jalpaiguri.
Facts:-
3. One Sub-Inspector named Gopal Chandra Mondal of Bhaktinagar P.S. (for short, “the informant”) registered Bhaktinagar P.S. Case No. 77 of 2020 against the petitioner and one Saje Saibo alleging that on January 28, 2020 at about 15:10 hrs, the informant received information from the said Police Station that few persons were moving suspiciously in front of the Office of the All India Radio, Siliguri and that they were carrying substantial quantity of contraband substances. The informant passed on this information to the Inspector-in-Charge, Bhaktinagar P.S. Pursuant to the instruction of the said Inspector-in-Charge, at around 15:15 hrs, the informant proceeded with a raiding team towards the Office of the All India Radio, Siliguri. The raiding team reached the spot at 15:25 hrs and intercepted the said two accused persons, one of whom is the petitioner. The accused persons were carrying red and yellow colour plastic bags. Upon serving due notice of search and seizure at around 16:15 hrs in the presence of a Gazetted Officer, the Inspector-in-Charge searched the plastic bags, which were in possession of the said two accused persons one of whom is the petitioner. Yaba Tablets much above the commercial quantity were recovered. The recovered contraband was duly seized and was sent to Bhaktinagar P.S. Malkhana and the accused persons including this petitioner were taken into custody. Accordingly to the State, the entire exercise stated herein was carried out in strict and due compliance of the provisions of the NDPS Act.
4. The petitioner was arrested on January 28, 2020. The petitioner was produced before the Learned Jurisdictional Magistrate on January 29, 2020. The statutory period of 180 days for completion of the investigation as envisaged under Section 36 A(4) of the NDPS Act expired on July 24, 2020. On July 31, 2020 the petitioner filed an application seeking default bail and on the self same day the prosecution preferred an application praying for extension of the period for completion of investigation beyond the statutory period of 180 days. The explanation offered on behalf of the prosecution for such delayed application was that due to the nationwide lock down imposed by the Government of India on account of outbreak of COVID-19 pandemic, the application could not be filed before the expiry of the statutory period.
5. By an order passed on the self same date i.e. July 31, 2020, the Learned Judge being the Special Court under NDPS Act, 2nd Court, Jalpaiguri (for short, “the NDPS Court”) rejected the petitioner’s prayer for default bail and allowed the application of the prosecution by extending the period for investigation with retrospective effect from July 24, 2020. The investigating officer submitted charge sheet against the petitioner and the co-accused Saje Saibo within the extended period.
6. The petitioner then moved CRM 6510 of 2020 with CRAN 1 of 2020 before a Coordinate Bench of this Court seeking bail. By an order dated October 15, 2020, the Coordinate Bench dismissed the said bail application.
7. The instant bail application, thus, is renewal of the prayer for bail filed by the petitioner.
Arguments:-
8. Mr. Shekhar Kumar Basu, Learned Senior Counsel, ably assisted by Mr. Soubhik Mitter, Learned Advocate, appearing for the petitioner submitted that, on July 24, 2020, the statutory period for completion of investigation ended and immediately thereafter on July 31, 2020 the petitioner applied for statutory bail before the Ju
Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. vs. State of Bihar
M. Ravindran vs. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Small Revenue Intelligence
Sayed Mohd Ahmad Kazmi v. State
Sanjay Dutt v. State through CBI: (1994) 5 SCC 410
State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Narmada Bachao Andolan & Anr.
The Punjab University, Chandigarh vs. Vijay Singh Lamba & Ors.
Union of India v. Nirala Yadav @ Raja Ram Yadav @ Deepak Yadav
The main legal point established is that the accused has an indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., and the court must take prompt action to enforce this right, restricting t....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the accused's indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and the prosecutor's obligations in seeking extension of time under S....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the accused's indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and the limitations on the Prosecutor's rights under Section 36-A(4) ....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the accused's indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and the obligations of the concerned Magistrate to promptly consider ....
The accused's right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. remains enforceable, and the court must promptly decide on bail applications to prevent the prosecution from circumventing this right.
The right to statutory bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is an indefeasible right that cannot be denied if the statutory period for filing a charge sheet is exceeded without proper extension and noti....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the accused's indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and the conditions for granting extension of time for investigation u....
The main legal point established is that the accused has an indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and the NDPS Act, and this right should not be denied due to delays or the ....
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is absolute if the investigation is not completed within the stipulated time, necessitating a public prosecutor's report for any extension.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.