Back
2022 Supreme(HP) 334
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
MS. JYOTSNA REWAL DUA, J.
Ajay Grover, S/o Late Sh. Manohar Lal Grover – Appellant
Versus
State Of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Misc. Petition (Main) No.923 of 2022
Decided on : 22-07-2022
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :MR. N.S.CHANDEL, MR. LOVNEESH SINGH THAKUR, ADVOCATE.
For the Respondent: MR. ARVIND SHARMA, MR. NARENDER SINGH THAKUR, MR. RAM LAL THAKUR, SI MUNISH KUMAR, POLICE STATION SUNDERNAGAR, adv
Point of Law : Once charge-sheet is filed within stipulated period, right of accused to statutory bail comes to an end.
Headnote:
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 167(2) – Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 304, 308, 328, 420, 468, 471, 201, 109, 120B, 341, 323 & 34 - H.P. Excise Act - Sections 39, 40 and 41 - Statutory bail - Criminal conspiracy - Causing death by negligence - Punishment for voluntarily causing hurt - Causing hurt by means of poison, etc., with intent to commit an offence - Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours - Petitioner was granted interim bail for a period of 21 days on account of alleged illness of his wife - Even in this petition, Cr.MP was moved seeking interim bail on the projected ground that petitioner’s wife was diagnosed with ‘cancer of endometrium’ requiring chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatment - Reasons put forth in application for grant of interim bail were strongly disputed on facts by investigating agency in its status report - Once charge-sheet is filed within stipulated period, right of accused to statutory bail comes to an end (Para 3).
Finding of the Court :
Petitioner had absolutely no role whatsoever to play in commission of offences alleged in FIR - Opposing bail plea, on behalf of State, it was pointed out that petitioner was not a mere illegal supplier of rectified spirit, which was sold for illegal manufacture of spurious liquor, but was also involved with other accused persons in illegal manufacture of spurious liquor - Prosecution has enough evidence indicating petitioner’s deep implication in FIR - He has criminal track record - He has committed very serious and heinous offences against society at large - Advocate General also submitted that petitioner will also try to win over prosecution witnesses and tamper prosecution evidence if released on bail
Result : Petition dismissed.
ORDER :
Due to consumption of illegally manufactured spurious country made liquor, seven persons lost their lives in January, 2022 and 14 others were injured. FIR No.15/2022 was registered regarding this on 19.01.2022 under Sections 304, 308, 328, 420, 468, 471, 201, 109 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Sections 39, 40 and 41 of the H.P. Excise Act at Police Station Sundernagar, District Mandi. Petitioner is one of the accused persons therein. He was arrested on 26.01.2022.
Vide order dated 05.05.2022, petitioner was granted interim bail for a period of 21 days in Cr.MP(M) No.819 of 2022 on account of alleged illness of his wife. In the present petition, his prayer is for release on regular bail. Even in this petition, Cr.MP No.1597 of 2022 was moved on 02.06.2022 seeking interim bail on the projected ground that petitioner’s wife was diagnosed with ‘cancer of endometrium’ requiring chemotherapy and radiotherapy treatment. The reasons put forth in the application for grant of interim bail were strongly disputed on facts by the investigating agency in its status report. The application for interim bail was eventually not pressed by the petitioner and was dismissed as withdrawn on 20.06.2022.
2. Learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has argued the instant bail petition on following two broad heads:-
(i). The petitioner deserves to be granted statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC).
(ii). On merits of the matter also, the petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail.
For convenience, the above grounds are separately discussed hereinafter.
3. Statutory bail:-
For obtaining statutory bail, it was contended, firstly that a defective police report was filed in the learned trial Court by the investigating agency. Objection in this police report was pointed out by the learned trial Court. Secondly, that the police report was also incomplete. The report of Forensic Science Laboratory was not made part of the police report. The submission of learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner was that the defective police report was filed only to defeat petitioner’s right to get statutory bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. Petitioner has a right to be released on statutory bail.
3(i) In (2019) 14 SCC 599, Chapal alias Ramswaroop and another Versus State of Rajasthan, Hon’ble Apex Court observed that Section 167 of the code has a definite purpose in that: on the basis of the material relating to investigation, the Magistrate ought to be in a position to proceed with the matter………….. The letter and spirit behind enactment of Section 167 of the code mandates that investigation ought to be completed within the prescribed period………………….. It is further stipulated that on the expiry of period of ninety or sixty days, as the case may be, accused person shall be released on bail if he is prepared to furnish bail. In the said case, on the 90th day, there was no charge-sheet in terms of Section 173 of the code for the concerned magistrate to assess the situation whether on merits the accused was required to be remanded to further custody. A charge-sheet filed on 05.07.2018, i.e. within the period prescribed under Section 167 of the Code, was returned to the investigating officer as the same was not in terms of the order passed by the High Court on 03.07.2018. Hon’ble Apex Court observed that the public prosecutor could have submitted before the High Court on 03.07.2018 that papers relating to the investigation were to be filed within the time prescribed and a call thereafter could be taken by the Superior Gazetted Officer whether the matter required further investigation in terms of Section 173(8) of the code or not. Recourse to this ideal situation was not resorted to. Since there were no papers of investigation before the Magistrate concerned as on completion of 90 days of prescribed period under Section 167 Cr.PC, therefore, the petitioners therein were held entitled to be admitted to bail in terms of Section 167(2) Cr.
