HIMACHAL PRADESH HIGH COURT
M. R. VERMA, J.
STATE OF H.P.
VERSUS
LAL SINGH
Criminal Revn. Petn. No. 36 of 2002,
Decided on : 25-7-2002.
Bail - Code of Criminal Procedure - S. 167 - Ss. 304-B, 498-A, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code
Fact of the Case:
The State filed a revision petition against the release of the accused on bail under Ss. 304-B, 498-A, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code, arguing that the accused could only be released on bail if the charge-sheet was not presented within 90 days, not 60 days as decided by the Sessions Judge.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the right to be released on bail accrues after 90 days from the date of remand for offences punishable with death, imprisonment for life, or imprisonment for a term of not less than 10 years, and after 60 days for any other offence.
Issues: The main issue was whether the accused could be released on bail if the charge-sheet was not submitted within 60 days or 90 days from the date of remand for an offence punishable under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code.
Ratio Decidendi: The court interpreted the proviso to S. 167(2) of the Code, emphasizing that the term of imprisonment referred to the maximum term provided under the law, not the minimum term necessarily to be awarded to the accused if found guilty.
Final Decision: The revision petition was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, the bail granted to the respondent was cancelled, and he was directed to surrender before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate within fifteen days.
Order :- This revision petition under Sections 397, 401 read with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure preferred by the State (hereafter referred to as 'the petitioner') is directed against the order dated 31-12-2001 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur District at Nahan directing release of the respondent/accused (hereafter referred to as 'the respondent') in a case under Sections 304-B, 494-A, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. Brief facts leading to the presentation of this petition are that the respondent has been arrested for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 304-B, 498-A, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code by Paonta Police. On 27-12-2001 the respondent filed an application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter referred to as 'the Code') in the Court of the learned Sessions Judge, Sirmaur at Nahan for his release on bail which was allowed on the ground that the charge-sheet against the respondent had not been presented within 60 days as provided under S. 167 of the Code. The grievance of the petitioner is that since one of the offences alleged to have been committed by the respondent is under S.304-B of the Indian Penal Code, therefore, the respondent could have been released on bail under Sec. 167 of the Code only if the charge-sheet was not presented within 90 days and not on the ground that the charge-sheet had not been presented within 60 days. Hence, the present petition.
3. I have heard the learned Assistant Advocate General for the petitioner and the learned Counsel for the respondent and have also perused the record.
4. It is not in dispute that one of the offence alleged to have been committed by the respondent is under Sec. 304-B of the Indian Penal Code. It is also not in dispute that the period of 60 days from the date of order of remand had expired before the filing of the application by the respondent but period of 90 days from the date of remand had not expired when the application for bail was instituted or even on the date when it was decided by the learned Sessions Judge. Thus, the only question for determination in this revision petition is whether, in a case where the accused is, inter alia, alleged to have committed an offence punishable under Section 304-B of the Indian Penal Code and is in custody because of pendency of investigation, right to be enlarged on bail will accrue to the accused if the charge-sheet is not submitted within 60 days or such right would accrue if the charge-sheet is not submitted within 90 days from the date of remand?
5. Clause (a) of proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the Code reads as follows :-
"167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours-
(1) and (2) *** *** *** ***
[(a) the Magistrate may authorise the detention of the accused person, otherwise than in the custody of the police, beyond the period of fifteen days, if he is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for doing so, but no Magistrate shall authorise the detention of the accused person in custody under this paragraph for a total period exceeding,-
(i) ninety days, where the investigation relates to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years;
(ii) sixty days, where the investigation relates to any other offence, and, on the expiry of the said period of ninety days, or sixty days, as the case may be, the accused person shall be released on bail if he is prepared to and does furnish bail, and every person released on bail under this sub-section shall be deemed to be so released under the provisions of Chapter XXXIII for the purposes of that Chapter;]"
6. It is clear on a bare reading of the aforesaid provisions that during the pendency of investigation a right to be released on bail shall accrue to an accused person detained in custody after expiry of 90 days from the date of remand, if the investigation relates to an offence punishable with death, impris
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.