IN THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK
A.K.MOHAPATRA, J.
Biswambara Kanhar and Others – Appellants
Versus
State of Odisha – Respondent
CRLREV No. 36 of 2022
Decided On : 20-05-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. criminal revision against denial of default bail. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. court's duty to inform accused of bail rights. (Para 3 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
| 3. petitioners contend right to default bail after 180 days. (Para 5 , 6 , 9 , 10) |
| 4. accused’s right to default bail can be denied post filing charge-sheet. (Para 18 , 19) |
| 5. impugned order set aside; default bail granted. (Para 20) |
| 6. order for petitioners' release on default bail. (Para 21 , 22) |
JUDGMENT :
A.K. MOHAPATRA, J.
1. The present criminal revision petition is directed against the order dated 12.01.2022 passed by the learned Special Judge, Phulbani in C.T. Case No.19 of 2021 arising out of Phiringia P.S. Case No.23 of 2021 thereby rejecting the prayer for default bail of the petitioners under the provisions of Section 167 (2) of the Cr.P.C.
2. The prosecution story, as unfolded from the F.I.R. bereft of unnecessary details, is that the present petitioners along with others were arrested in the above noted P.S. case for the offence under Section 20 (b)(ii)(C) of the N.D.P.S. Act and as such, they are in judicial custody since 21.12.2021. It is alleged that on 20.02.2021 at about 4.10 A.M., IIC Phiringia Police Station received credible information that many persons are in possession of contraband Ganja i.e. flowering and fruiting tops of cannabis plants in 23 numbers of plastic bags are waiting in a lonely place i.e. beside the road at village Melupada under a mango tree and in front of the house of one Ratnakar Kanhar for transportation. As per the direction of IIC, Phiringia Police Station, S.I. of police along with other police party members proceeded to the spot and found that four persons were sitting on the plastic bags and some of them were standing nearby. On seeing the police party, the accused persons tried to flee away from the spot. However, the police team caught hold of four accused persons at the spot. On being asked, they disclosed their names which also includes the present petitioner and further upon search it was found that plastic bags were containing 11 quintals of contraband ganja. The contraband articles were seized from the spot and the accused persons were arrested and forwarded in the present case.
3. In view of the provisions contained in Section 167 (2) as well as in Section 36 -A(4) of the N.D.P.S. Act, charge-sheet should have been filed within 180 days from the date of remand of the present petitioners as the offence alleged involves more than commercial quantity of contraband substances. Therefore, taking into consideration the aforesaid 180 days period, the charge-sheet should been filed on or before 20.08.2021 Further, it is made clear that in the event charge-sheet is not filed within the aforesaid 180 days period, then the Investigating Officer should have approached the Special court by filing an application for extension of the period for filing the final form in the matter and in such eventuality the Special court under the proviso of -A(4) of the NDPS Act is competent to extend the period for filing final form up to one year on the report of the Public Prosecutor intimating the progress of the investigation and by assigning specific reasons for detaining all the accused beyond the period of 180 days.
4. Heard Mr. A. Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioners as well as Mr. P.C. Das, learned Additional Standing Counsel for the State. Perused the case diary as well as materials available on record.
5. It is submitted by Mr. Tripathy, learned counsel for the petitioners, that the petitioners were arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 21.02.2021 and that the charge-sheet should have been filed within 180 days i.e. on or before 20.08.2021. it is further submitted that the Investigating Officer has failed to file the charge-sheet within the aforesaid stipulated period of time. Further no application as provided in the proviso to Section 36 A (4) of the N.D.P.S. Act was present to the said court for extension of time to
Rakesh Kumar Paul vs. State of Assam
M. Ravidran vs. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence
The right to default bail is an indefeasible right linked to Article 21 of the Constitution and is subject to the law and procedure laid down by the Legislature.
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is an indefeasible right that cannot be extinguished by the mere filing of an incomplete chargesheet.
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) is indefeasible and cannot be circumvented by the filing of a charge-sheet after the statutory period.
Point of Law : Psychotropic drugs - Indefeasible right of accused - Accused to get default bail is accrued and it is indefeasible right of the accused which cannot be defeated by prosecution after co....
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is absolute if the investigation is not completed within the stipulated time, necessitating a public prosecutor's report for any extension.
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is absolute and must be granted if the prosecution fails to file a challan within the stipulated time, as per Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act.
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.