IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
D.N. PATEL, J.
State of Gujarat - Applicant
Versus
Jethisinh Kulubava Padhiyar - Respondent
Criminal Revision Application No. 260 of 2008
Decided On : 30-04-2008
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 - Section 167(2) - Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 406, 420, 417, 408, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) and 114 - Criminal Revision Application has been preferred by the State of Gujarat against the judgment and order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, in Criminal Revision Application, whereby bail has been granted to in connection with offence registered with Police Station, for offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 417, 408, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120(B) and 114 of Indian Penal Code, mainly for reason that charge - sheet/ challan has not been filed by police within a period of sixty days and, therefore, bail has been granted to accused, under Section 167(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure,1973 - Against this judgment and award, State has preferred this Criminal Revision Application for cancellation of bail - Held, it is apparent that pending investigation relating to an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term "not less than 10 years", the Magistrate is empowered to authorise the detention of the accused in custody for not more than 90 days. For rest of the offences, period prescribed is 60 days - Under Section 386 punishment provided is imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to 10 years and also fine - That means, imprisonment can be for a clear period of 10 years or less - Hence, it could not be said that minimum sentence would be 10 years or more - Judgment and award passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court in Criminal Revision Application, is hereby quashed and set aside - Application Allowed
JUDGMENT :
D.N. Patel, J.
Rule. Learned counsel Mr. B.B. Naik waives service of notice of Rule on behalf of the Respondent.
2. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor on behalf of the applicant State submitted that :-
- Thereafter, was arrested on 10th May, 2007 ;
- Allegation against the is that an amount of Rs. 53,47,847/- has been misappropriated of the Baroda Central Co-Operative Bank Ltd.;
- Investigation was carried out and the charge sheet was filed on 10th May, 2007;
- It appears from the facts of the case that the respondent applied for bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, before the Trial Court on 13th July, 2007;
- The charge-sheet was filed on 63rd day and, therefore, it was contended by the respondent before the Trial Court that as the charge-sheet is not filed within sixty days, the respondent is entitled to be enlarged on bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973;
- The Trial Court has dismissed this application vide order dated 18th July, 2007;
- Against dismissal of this application, Criminal Revision Application No.189 of 2007 was preferred by the respondent before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara and it is submitted that the offence is punishable under Sections 467 and 409, the sentence, can be awarded for less than 10 years also and, therefore, sixty days is the prescribed period for filing of charge-sheet/challan, under Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Charge-sheet is not filed within sixty days and, therefore, the respondent is entitled to be enlarged on bail.
- Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara has therefore, granted bail to the respondent, interpreting the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court and the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and observed that charge-sheet/ challan ought to have been filed within a period of sixty days and the same has not been filed within prescribed period and, therefore, bail was granted to the respondent.
- Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the applicant-State argued out the case in detail and has relied upon the judgment delivered by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Bhupinder Singh & Ors. Vs. Jarnail Singh and another reported in 2006 Cri.L.J. 3621, especially in paras 8, 11 to 14 and has pointed out that in the facts of the present case, if the maximum sentence awardable is life imprisonment, the Court has to look into the maximum sentence and maximum period of ninety days is prescribed for filing of the charge-sheet/challan and not sixty days. This is an error apparent on the face of the judgment delivered by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Vadodara and, therefore, the order passed by the learned Additio
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.