RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
Kuldeep Mathur, J.
Moti Singh & Ors. - Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application No. 12246 of 2022
Decided On : 20-02-2023
Bail - Miscellaneous Bail Application - Cr.P.C. Sections 439, 167(2) - The court interpreted the provisions of Sections 439 and 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. regarding bail eligibility, emphasizing that the interim order restricting the filing of the charge-sheet affected the timeline for default bail claims.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioners sought bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. after being arrested for serious offences, claiming entitlement to default bail due to the charge-sheet not being filed within 90 days, despite an interim order preventing its filing.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners could not claim default bail as the delay in filing the charge-sheet was due to a court order, and they had not approached the court with clean hands, concealing relevant facts.
Issues: Whether the petitioners are entitled to bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. and if the delay in filing the charge-sheet warrants default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners could not benefit from the delay in filing the charge-sheet caused by a court order, and their concealment of material facts undermined their claim for bail.
Result: The application for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.
JUDGMENT
Kuldeep Mathur, J. - The present misc. bail application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. has been filed in connection with FIR No.102/2022 registered at P.S. Nawa Shahar, District Nagaur for offences punishable under Section 147, 148, 149, 341, 427, 302, 120B IPC and 3/25 Arms Act.
2. The complainant lodged an FIR No.102/2022 at P.S. Nawa Shahar, District Nagaur for offences under Section 147, 148, 149, 341, 427, 302, 120 B IPC and 3/25 Arms Act. As per the F.I.R., on 14.05.2022, the complainant's husband, Jaipal Poonia (deceased) informed her that he will be going to court at 12:30 P.M. to attend court proceedings. The complainant around 03:15 P.M., received a phone call from Rajendra Kumar's (brother of the deceased) mobile phone upon which the deceased on the phone, stated inter alia that around 02:00-02:15 P.M., while he was returning from the court after attending the proceedings, a Bolero car suddenly stopped in front of his car, from which, two masked men along with Moolchand Saini and Guda Salt Sarpanch, Virendra Saini stepped out. They told Jaipal (deceased) that they have come to teach him a lesson as he had picked enmity with Moti Singh and MLA Mahendra Choudhary. Whereupon, they started vandalising his car by giving lathi blows and fired gun shots at him. The complainant was further informed on call that her husband Jaipal (deceased) has been referred by Nawa Hospital to Jaipur. The deceased was taken to Jaipur by Rajendra, Radheshyam and Om Prakash. At around 04:00 P.M., the complainant received the information of passing away of his husband attributable to the gun shots fired at him by the perpetrators.
3. As per the FIR, the deceased had in past received death threats from Moti Singh, brother of MLA Mahendra Choudhary, who had once attacked the deceased by entering into their house along with 2-3 goons; the case is pending trial.
4. After filing of the FIR No.102/2022 at PS Nawa Shahar, District Nagaur, the Investigating Agency arrested present petitioners on 18.05.2022 for the offences under Section 147, 148, 149, 341, 427, 302, 120 B IPC and 3/25 Arms Act.
5. The complainant (wife of the deceased) after filing of FIR No.102/2022 at PS Nawa Shahar, District Nagaur apprehended that since the matter is politically sensitive, due to possibility of political interference and other extraneous reasons, the police may not investigate the matter fairly. Thus, S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No.3399/2022 (Sarita Choudhary vs. State of Rajasthan) was preferred by her before a co-ordinate Bench this Court seeking a direction upon Investigating Agency to conduct investigation in a fair and an unbiased manner.
6. A co-ordinate Bench of this Court in S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No.3399/2022 (Sarita Choudhary vs. State of Rajasthan), vide order dated 01.06.2022, while issuing show cause notices upon respondents was pleased to pass the following interim order:-
Issue notice to the respondents.
Counsel for the petitioner shall be at liberty to serve the respondents through their regularly appearing counsels.
List on 27.06.2022.
In the meanwhile, challan in this case shall not been filed without permission of Court'
7. While the S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No.3399/2022 (Sarita Choudhary vs. State of Rajasthan) was pending before co-ordinate Bench this Court, an application (I.A. No.3/2022) came to be filed by the Public Prosecutor stating inter alia that investigation in the case is complete qua 9 accused persons and the challan is ready for being filed, therefore, Investigating Agency may be permitted to file the challan before competent criminal court while keeping the same pending for remaining accused.
8. The co-ordinate Bench of this Court after hearing learned counsel for the parties on the above-mentioned application (I.A. No.3/2022), vide order dated 23.08.2022 modified the interim ord
Achpal @ Ramswaroop & Anr. vs. State of Rajasthan 2018 AIR (SC) 4647
Jigar@ Jimmy Pravinchandra Adatiya vs. State of Gujarat 2022 AIR (SC) 4641
M. Ravindran vs. The Intelligence Officer
Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr. 2022 AIR (SC) 3386
The court established that an interim order preventing the filing of a charge-sheet negates claims for default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.
Default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is forfeited once a charge sheet is filed, and the right to default bail does not survive after such filing.
The court established that a valid report from the Public Prosecutor is essential for extending the time to file a charge-sheet, and failure to comply with procedural requirements negates the right t....
An accused's right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is extinguished if the application is not filed before the completion of the charge-sheet process.
The court confirms that an accused is entitled to default bail if a charge sheet is not filed within 60 days, regardless of subsequent charges.
Though accused has right to make successive applications for grant of bail, court entertaining such subsequent bail applications has a duty to consider reasons and grounds on which earlier bail appli....
(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 ....
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.