An accused has an indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. if no chargesheet is filed within the statutory period, and rights must be equally upheld among co-accused.

JUDGMENT :

GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.

CRM-48051-2025:

1. The application i.e. CRM-48051-2025 has been filed on behalf of the applicant – Avtar Singh under Section 21 (5) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 read with Section 528 BNSS for condonation of delay of 1415 days in filing the appeal i.e. CRA-D-260-2022. The applicant, in the annexed appeal, assails order dated 11.04.2019 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court, Amritsar, vide which his revision petition against order dated 25.02.2019 passed by the SDJM, Ajnala, seeking default bail in terms of Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. (now Section 187 ) in a case arising out of FIR No.121 dated 18.11.2018 registered at Police Station Raja Sansi, Amritsar, under Sections 302 , 307, 452, 341, 427, 34 IPC ; Section 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 3 , 4, 5, 6 of the Explosive Act and Sections 13 , 16, 18, 18-B of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, has been dismissed.

2. Learned counsel for the applicant, while pressing upon the aforesaid application for condonation of delay of 1415 days, submitted that as a matter of fact the applicant – Avtar Singh alongwith co-accused Bikramjit Singh had applied jointly for concession of default bail in the FIR in question, which was dismissed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ajnala on 25.02.2019 and that a joint revision petition preferred against the said order i.e. Criminal Revision No.133/2019, was also dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court, Amritsar on 11.04.2019. While the applicant – Avtar Singh did not approach this Court against order dated 11.04.2019, co-accused - Bikramjit Singh had filed a petition in this Court i.e. CRM-M-19259- 2019, seeking bail as per provisions of Section 167 (2)(a)(i)(ii) Cr.P.C., which also came to be dismissed on 30.10.2019. Thereafter, co-accused – Bikramjit Singh approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court, wherein his appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.667 of 2020 (SLP (Criminal) No.2933 of 2020) was accepted and he was granted default bail vide order dated 12.10.2020 in terms of provisions of (2) Cr.P.C.

3. Learned counsel submitted that unlike his co-accused – Bikramjit Singh, the applicant/appellant was not possessed of sufficient means to approach this Court or Hon’ble the Supreme Court and it was only subsequently when Hon’ble the Supreme Court granted bail to co-accused – Bikramjit Singh that his relatives and friends arranged funds and approached this Court with a hope that he (applicant) may also be granted identical relief and filed a petition i.e. CRM-M-35642-2020 under Section 482 read with Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C on 28.10.2020 i.e. within two weeks of the order passed in the case of co-accused – Bikramjit Singh by Hon’ble the Supreme Court. It has been submitted that later on the said petition i.e. CRM-M-35642-2020, came to be treated as an appeal i.e. CRA-D-260- 2022 pursuant to order dated 28.01.2022 passed by learned Single Judge of this Court and that as such, the present appeal has been pending in this Court since the last about 5 years.

4. Learned counsel submitted that under these circumstances where an indefeasible right had accrued in favour of the applicant/appellant and since identically situated co-accused – Bikramjit Singh had already been extended the concession of default bail, the applicant who was a co- applicant with Bikramjit Singh when their joint application for default bail was declined, also deserves the similar concession particularly when on account o