The court emphasized that Section 437(6) of the Cr.P.C. is not mandatory but directory, and the accused is entitled to apply for bail if the trial is not completed within sixty days, unless there are justifiable reasons to refuse bail.

JUDGMENT

B.P.Routray, J. - The petitioner has prayed to release him on bail in connection with Keonjhar Sadar P.S.Case No.166 of 2019 corresponding to G.R.Case No.781 of 2019 pending in the court of the learned S.D.J.M., Keonjhar.

The offences alleged in this case are under Sections 468/471/420/34 of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation that the petitioner being the C.E.O. of a company, named Vatsalya Empire could manage to cheat the innocent villagers in collecting lakhs of rupees giving false assurance of providing monthly stipend and livestock to them.

2. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that, he has been arrested on 3.7.2019 and in the meantime twenty-six witnesses have been examined in course of trial. The petitioner thrust upon the provision of sub-section 6 of Section 437 of the Cr.P.C. by submitting that despite completion of sixty days from the date of examination of the first witness, the trial is yet to be completed and since the trial could not be completed within the said period of sixty days, he is bound to be released on bail, being in custody for the whole period from 3.7.2019 till date.

3. On the contrary, learned counsel for the State submits that the allegations leveled against the petitioner is relating to misappropriation of lakhs of rupees, which he had collectively taken along with other accused persons from the innocent villagers with false assurance to them for providing monthly stipend and goats. It is also submitted by the learned counsel for the State that the provision contemplated under Section 437(6) of the Cr.P.C. does not lay any mandate in favour of the accused petitioner for his release on bail in default to complete the trial within the period of sixty days from the first date of examination of witness. It is also submitted that the mandate of the legislation is not to release the accused in every case irrespective of the facts considered. Therefore, the learned court below has rightly rejected the prayer for bail of the petitioner considering the prevailing situations of continued lockdown.

4. Perusal of case record reveals that the petitioner is inside custody since 3.7.2019 in connection with the aforesaid case. The petitioner had earlier approached this Court in BLAPL No.6698 of 2019 for his release on bail, which was filed on 31.7.2019 and disposed of by order of this Court on 20.2.2020 rejecting his prayer for bail. But presently the petitioner renews his prayer for bail resting upon the provision under Section 437(6) of the Cr.P.C.. Though the petitioner has stressed upon the provision of Section 437(6) of the Cr.P.C., still he did not choose to file the copy of the petition filed before the learned S.D.J.M., nor the order passed by the learned S.D.J.M. in that regard. The petitioner only files the copy of the order passed by the Sessions court dated 9.6.2020. The said order of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Keonjhar reveals that the petitioner is inside custody since 3.7.2019 and the date of examination of first witness is dated 26.7.2019 and the date of examination of last witness as yet i.e. P.W.6, on 24.2.2020.

5. As the submission of the petitioner is concentrated on the provision under Section 437 (6) of the Cr.P.C., the focal point for consideration is that, whether the accused has the indefeasible right to be released on bail under Section 437(6) of the Cr.P.C., in case the trial is not completed within the period of sixty days as stated therein ?

6. It is relevant to reproduce Section 437(6) of the Cr.P.C here. The said provision reads as follows:

"437. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence.- xxx xxx xxx

(6) if, in any case triable by a Magistrate, the trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case, such person shall, if he is in custody during the whole of the said period, be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate, unless