The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation of Section 167(2)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and its applicability to the offence punishable under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

1. By way of the present petition filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') the petitioner has assailed the order dated 18.07.2017 (hereinafter referred to as the 'Impugned Order') in Criminal Revision No. 120/17 passed by Additional Session Judge (hereinafter referred to as 'ASJ'), Rohini Courts, Delhi whereby, respondents No. 2 and 3 have been granted bail in case FIR No. 12/2017 under Sections 306/34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') registered at Police Station - Shalimar Bagh, New Delhi.

2. The contextual matrix of the case as set out in the petition is that, the petitioner lodged an FIR against respondents No. 2, 3 and others, alleging that the accused persons conspired against the deceased father of the petitioner. In furtherance of that conspiracy, they allegedly abetted his suicide.

3. The respondents No. 2 and 3 moved an application seeking bail which was dismissed by the Trial Court vide order dated 06.07.2017, on the ground of non-submission of charge sheet within ninety days as prescribed under clause (i) of Section 167(2)(a) Cr.P.C.

4. Thereafter, respondents No. 2 and 3 aggrieved by the order of the Trial Court, preferred a Revision Petition No.120/17 before the Session Court. The ASJ relied on Rajeev Chaudhary vs. State (NCT) of Delhi, reported in (2001) CAR 463, wherein it was inter-alia observed that where an offence is punishable for a term which may extend to 10 years, the chargesheet has to be filed within 60 days and only in cases where the offence was punishable for a term "not less than 10 years", the chargesheet ought to be filed within 90 days from the day of arrest. On the basis of the above observation, the ASJ granted bail to the respondents No. 2 & 3, vide order dated 18.07.2017 holding that, the limitation for filing the chargesheet would be 60 days, as the respondents were involved in an offence under Section 306 IPC, punishable with "imprisonment for a term which may extend to ten years". Hence, the present petition.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner, relying on the judgement of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Bhupinder Singh and Ors. vs. Jarnail Singh and Anr. reported in AIR (2006) SC 2622, has challenged the impugned order on the ground that the relief to the respondents under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C is unwarranted, as the offence complained of is of grave and serious nature; and therefore the said order is bad in law and is liable to be set aside.

6. Per contra, the learned counsel for the respondents have placed reliance upon Rajeev Chaudhary vs. State (NCT) of Delhi reported in (2001) CAR 463 and State vs. B.B. Singh reported in 2004 (1) JCC 640. The learned counsel contended that as the punishment prescribed for offence punishable under Section 306 IPC is "imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to ten years....", therefore chargesheet ought to have been filed within 60 days from the date of arrest. As the chargesheet had not been filed within the prescribed statutory period, the respondents were entitled to statutory bail.

7. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the submissions made by the learned counsels for the parties and perused the material available on record.

8. The issue that arises for consideration in the present case is that,

"Whether in a case involving an offence punishable under Section 306 IPC, the period of filing chargesheet would be 90 days or 60 days."

9. Returning to the ratio laid down in Rajeev Chaudhary vs. State (NCT) of Delhi reported in (2001) CAR 463, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has inter-alia observed that:

"............. clause (i) of proviso (a) to Section 167(2), it would be applicable in case where investigation relates to an offence punishable (1) with death; (2) imprisonment for life; and (3) imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years. It would not cover the offence for which punishment could be imprisonment for less than 10 years. Under Se