The main legal point established in the judgment is that the right to default bail is circumscribed by the prosecution's right to seek an extension of time for filing the charge sheet before the expiry of the prescribed period.

JUDGMENT

Meenakshi I. Mehta, J. - Feeling aggrieved by the order dated 19.02.2021 handed down by learned Additional Sessions Judge (while exercising the powers of the Judge, Special Court at Kapurthala) whereby the application preferred by the present appellant as well as his co-accused namely Sukhjinder Singh @ Bittu, Mohit Sharma@ Lacchi, Mangal Singh @ Mangal and Lovepreet Singh @ Love @ Dhillon under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (for short ‘the Cr.P.C.’) claiming default bail, has been dismissed, the appellant has preferred the instant appeal.

2. Bereft of unnecessary details, the facts, culminating in the appeal in hand, are that on 07.05.2020, a formal FIR bearing No.140 was registered against the appellant and his afore-named co-accused and also one Baljinder Singh at Police Station Sultanpur Lodhi District Kapurthala, under Sections 384,465,467,468,471,473,489 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act as well as Sections 13/18 of the Unlawful Activity Prevention Act, 1967(for short “the UAP Act”) wherein the offences under Sections 120-B, 482, 121, 121-A, 122 IPC and Section 19 of the UAP Act are stated to have been added later-on. The appellant was arrested on 08.05.2020. The period prescribed under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. for the presentation of the Police Report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (Challan/Charge-sheet) was 90 days (which, of course, is extendable up to 180 days as envisaged under the proviso appended to Section 43-D(2) of the UAP Act). And the same was/is claimed to have expired/lapsed on 05.08.2020. However, on 03.08.2020, the concerned Additional Public Prosecutor filed an application before the Special Court at Kapurthala, seeking extension of the said period beyond 90 days. Notice of this application was given to the appellant and his co-accused for 04.08.2020. Since the Courts were functioning in a restrictive manner at that time due to the outbreak of Pandemic Covid-19, the said application was taken up by the Duty Officer/Judge on 05.08.2020 and was adjourned. In the meanwhile, on 06.08.2020, the appellant moved an application before learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Sultanpur Lodhi, under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. for claiming default bail as the Challan/Charge-sheet was not presented within the prescribed period of 90 days. But, vide order Annexure A-4 passed on the same day, the said application was ordered to be sent to the Special Court, Kapurthala as the Judicial Magistrate 1st Class had no jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offences alleged to have been committed in this case. On 07.08.2020, the application filed by the prosecution on 03.08.2020, seeking extension of time to present the Challan was allowed vide order Annexure A-5 and the afore-said period was extended for another spell of 90 days.  Whereafter, the appellant preferred criminal revision on 14.09.2020 to assail the said order dated 06.08.2020 (Annexure P-4), vide which the papers regarding the application moved by the appellant under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. were forwarded to the Special Court, Kapurthala. The case of the appellant is that it was/is during the pendency of the said criminal revision petition, it came to the knowledge of his counsel that his bail application was yet to be decided by the Special Court and his co-accused Sukhjinder Singh @ Bittu moved an application for the disposal thereof. But, vide the impugned order dated 19.02.2021, the Special Court, relying upon the decision of the Apex Court in Rambeer Shokeen Vs. State of NCT of Delhi 2018 AIR (SC) 688, dismissed the application moved by the appellant seeking default bail, as the application seeking extension of time for filing the charge sheet was moved on 03.08.2020, i.e. prior to the expiry of the statutory period of 90 days which expired on 05.08.2020. Hence, the present appeal.

3. We have heard Mr. Ruhani Chadha, learned counsel for the appellant and learned State counsel in this appeal and have also perused the file thoroughly.

4. Learned coun