SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2024 Supreme(All) 780

IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
HON'BLE ATTAU RAHMAN MASOODI, HON'BLE MANISH KUMAR NIGAM, JJ.
Mohammed Aleem @ Abdul Aleem And Another – Appellants
Versus
State Of Uttar Pradesh – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. - 2376 of 2023, Criminal Appeal No. - 2377 of 2023, Criminal Appeal No. - 2378 of 2023, CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2379 of 2023, CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2380 of 2023, CRIMINAL APPEAL No. - 2381 of 2023
Decided on : 14-05-2024

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant : Furkan Pathan
For the Respondent: G.A.

An accused is entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. if charges are not filed within the statutory period, emphasizing the fundamental right to personal liberty.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 167(2) - Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 - Section 43-D - Default bail - Various appeals against orders of the Special Court denying bail applications filed on the ground of default after expiry of statutory period of 90 days; court finds extension orders improperly passed without presence of accused or proper application by the Public Prosecutor, thereby entitling appellants to default bail. (Paras 9-10, 15-18, 36-46, 69)

(B) Personal liberty - Right to default bail derived from failure of prosecution to comply with statutory timelines - Legislative intent reinforces the need for prompt investigation balanced with protection of accused's liberty. (Paras 12, 24, 60)

(C) Reasoned orders - Importance of recording reasons in judicial decisions to ensure transparency and legality in decision-making; unreasoned extensions impermissible. (Paras 50-52)

Facts of the case:
Appeals arise from orders rejecting bail applications based on alleged expiry of investigation periods; court noted multiple procedural irregularities including lack of notice and failure to secure presence of accused during extensions for investigations.

Findings of Court:
Special Court's extensions found illegal, necessitating granting of default bail to appellants as of right.

Issues: Whether proper procedure followed for extension of time for investigation; rights of the accused in relation to default bail post-charge sheet filing; procedural safeguards under Section 167.

Ratio Decidendi: Default bail is a fundamental right when investigation exceeds legally allowed time without filing a charge-sheet; orders made without following statutory requirements rendered invalid.

Result: Appeals allowed; appellants granted default bail under specified conditions.

Table of Content
1. procedural adherence in court hearings. (Para 1)
2. details of case initiation and bail applications. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6)
3. importance of statutory periods and bail rights. (Para 7 , 8 , 9)
4. arguments regarding statutory compliance by the prosecution. (Para 10 , 11)
5. interpretation of procedural guarantees in criminal justice. (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15)
6. court's reasoning on procedural failures. (Para 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21)
7. constitutional safeguards related to personal liberty. (Para 22 , 23 , 24)
8. discussion on rights linked to personal liberty. (Para 25 , 26 , 27)
9. case law references on default bail. (Para 28 , 29 , 30 , 31 , 32)
10. understanding legal interpretations and their implications. (Para 33 , 34 , 35 , 36)
11. statutory interpretation and requirements for bail. (Para 37 , 38 , 39 , 40)
12. final rulings on procedural adherence. (Para 41 , 42 , 43)
13. conclusion on legal positions related to bail. (Para 44 , 45)
14. reinforcement of bail rights and court orders. (Para 46 , 47)
15. framework of judicial oversight and procedural integrity. (Para 48 , 49 , 50)
16. summation and reaffirmation of judicial conclusions. (Para 51 , 52 , 53 , 54 , 55)
17. final consideration on statutory provisions. (Para 56 , 57)
18. impact of procedural missteps on justice delivery. (Para 58 , 59)
19. endorsement of personal liberty rights and their provisions. (Para 60 , 61)
20. examination of personal liberty and related jurisprudence. (Para 62 , 63 , 64 , 65)
21. final conclusions enabling bail provisions. (Para 66 , 67)

JUDGMENT :

Per: Manish Kumar Nigam, J.

1. We have heard Shri Aarif Ali, Sri O.P. Tiwari and Sri Furkan Pathan, learned counsel for the appellants, learned Sri Shiv Nath Tilhari, Additional Government Advocate for the State-respondent and perused the record.

2. Criminal Appeal No. 2376 of 2023 ( Mohammed Aleem @ Abdul Aleem and another v. State of U.P. ) has been filed against the order dated 03.02.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Special Judge, N.I.A., Lucknow in Bail Application No. 148 of 2023, rejecting the default bail application of the appellants under Section 167 (2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) read with Section 43 -D of Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967 (hereinafter referred to as the ‘Act of 1967’) in Case Crime No. 4 of 2022, under Section 121A, 123 I.P.C. and Section 13 , 18, 18B, 20, 38 of Act of 1967, registered at Police Station A.T.S., Lucknow. Criminal Appeal No. 2377 of 2023 ( Lukman v. State of U.P. ) has been filed against the order dated 03.02.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Special Judge, N.I.A., Lucknow in Bail Application No. 86 of 2023, rejecting the default bail application of the appellants under Section 167 (2) of Cr.P.C. read with Section 43 -D of the Act of 1967 in Case Crime No. 4 of 2022, under Section 121A, 123 I.P.C. and Section 13 , 18, 18B, 20, 38 of Act of 1967, registered at Police Station A.T.S., Lucknow. Criminal Appeal No. 2378 of 2023 ( Mudassir and another v. State of U.P. ) has been filed against the order dated 03.02.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Special Judge, N.I.A., Lucknow in Bail Application No. 145 of 2023, rejecting the default bail application of the appellants under Section 167 (2) of Cr.P.C. read with Section 43 -D of the Act of 1967 in Case Crime No. 4 of 2022, under Section 121A, 123 I.P.C. and Section 13 , 18, 18B, 20 38 of Act of 1967, registered at Police Station A.T.S., Lucknow.

Criminal Appeal No. 2379 of 2023 ( Mohammad Nadeem and another v. State of U.P. ) has been filed against the order dated 03.02.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Special Judge, N.I.A., Lucknow in Bail Application No. 985 of 2023, rejecting the default bail application of the appellants under Section 167 (2) of Cr.P.C. read with Section 43 -D of the Act of 1967 in Case Crime No. 3 of 2022, under Section 121A, 123 I.P.C. an

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon Back to top