IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Amit Sharma, J.
Avinash Jain – Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau of Investigation – Respondent
Bail Appln. 583 of 2023 & Cr.M.(BAIL) 274 of 2023
Decided On : 18-05-2023
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for bail and basis of fir (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. details regarding arrest and charge sheet (Para 5 , 6 , 11) |
| 3. challenges against the charge sheet presented (Para 12 , 15 , 16) |
| 4. court's observations on the ongoing investigation (Para 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 5. discussion on section 17a of the pc act (Para 22 , 23 , 24) |
| 6. constitutional implications of personal liberty under article 21 (Para 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 7. court's verdict on the alleged incompleteness of the charge sheet (Para 31 , 32 , 33) |
| 8. final decision allowing default bail (Para 34 , 35 , 36) |
JUDGMENT
Amit Sharma, J.
1. The present application under Section 439 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`CrPC') seeks the following prayers:
"A. Pass necessary orders and directions, thereby directing for grant of statutory/default bail to the Petitioner and directing for the release of the Petitioner from custody in FIR bearing No. RC2232020A0009 dated 19.11.2020 u/s 120B r/w 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and 13(2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered by CBI, ACV, New Delhi, on such terms and conditions as may deem fit and proper.
AND
B. Pass necessary orders and directions, thereby setting aside the order dated 10.02.2023 passed by the Ld. Trial Court in the matter titled as `CBI vs. M/s Arise India Ltd.' in IA No. 1/23 in CBI Case No.10/2023 pertaining to FIR bearing No. RC2232020A0009 dated 19.11.2020 u/s 120B r/w 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and 13(2) r/w 13 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 registered by CBI, AC-V, New Delhi.
AND
C. Pass any other necessary and appropriate orders and direction, as this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case, in the interest of justice."
Background
2. The present FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint received from S. Bavani Sankaran, Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, SAMB-I (`SBI') on behalf of a consortium of six banks alleging that M/s Arise India Ltd. (`the company') and its directors, including the present applicant alongwith other unknown public servants availed credit facilities from the said consortium of banks led by the SBI and diverted the borrowed funds for purposes other than those for which they were released. The loan account of the company was declared as a Non-Performing Asset (`NPA') by the SBI on 27.02.2017 and subsequently by other banks in the consortium, with a total outstanding amount of Rs. 512.67 Crores. After a forensic audit, the account of the company was declared as a `fraud' by the SBI on 27.05.2019.
3. On the basis of the aforesaid complaint, the present FIR was registered against M/s Arise India Ltd., Avinash Jain (applicant herein), Virender Mishra, Rajnish, unknown public servants and other unknown private persons under Section 120B read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC') and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (`PC Act') for causing wrongful loss of public money on 19.11.2020. The applicant was arrested on 14.11.2022 in the said FIR for offences under Section 120B read with Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the IPC and Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of the PC Act. He was produced before the learned Special Judge on 15.11.2022 and remanded to judicial custody for one day. Thereafter, after five days in police custody granted vide order dated 16.11.2022, he was remanded to judicial custody on 21.12.2022. The CBI filed a chargesheet, dated 30.12.2022, on 06.01.2023 qua the applicant and other accused persons under Section 120B read with Sections 420 and 471 of the IPC and substantive offences thereof. In the said chargesheet, it was stated that further investigation was continuing in terms of Section 173(8) of the CrPC.
4. An application for default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC was moved on behalf of the applicant herein on 01.02.2023, which was dismissed vide order dated 1
(1) Default bail – Once challan has been filed, question of grant of bail has to be considered and decided only with reference to merits of case under provisions relating to grant of bail to accused ....
(1) Default bail – An incomplete charge-sheet filed without completing investigation cannot be used to defeat right of statutory bail under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C.(2) Default bail – Investigative a....
Once chargesheet has been filed within the stipulated time, the question of grant of statutory bail or default does not arise.
The main legal principle established is that the accused is entitled to default bail if the investigation is not completed within the mandated period, as per the legislative intent of section 167(2) ....
(1) Default bail – Period of 90 days is stated to be counted when investigation for fresh offence(s) is started and not from date of lodging of FIR.(2) Default bail – Right to seek default/statutory ....
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. ceases once a charge-sheet is filed, even if MCOCA is invoked subsequently.
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the CrPC is a fundamental right linked to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution, and its applicability to subsequent arrestees after ....
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.