The failure to include a ballistic report in a charge-sheet does not automatically render it incomplete under Section 167(2)(a)(i) Cr.P.C., especially in serious offences like murder where evidence is sufficient for prosecution.

JUDGMENT :

RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.

1. This criminal revision has been filed against the judgement and order dated 3.7.2024 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Saharanpur whereby second bail application moved moved in default clause under section 167(2)(a)(i) Cr.P.C. has been dismissed in Case Crime no. 131 of 2023, under section 302 IPC and section 3/25/27 of ARMS ACT , P.S. Nanauta, District Saharanpur.

2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for respondent no. 2 and learned AGA for the State.

3. According to the prosecution version, FIR of the incident was lodged by the informant Smt. Hamida on 3.8.2023 at 5:09 AM stating therein that on 2.8.2023 at around 11:00 PM, her co-villager Inam son of Yameen came to her house and called her son Naushad for doing some conversation and took her son outside the village in the field of Jafari where he assaulted her son by butt of country made pistol and thereafter he opened fire due to which her son suffered injury on face and hand by the pallets of cartridge, after hearing noise of fire, informant and her another son Shoyeb reached at the spot then the accused Inam fled away from the place. The FIR was lodged under sections 323, 307 IPC against named accused Inam. The injured Naushad was got medically examined at CHC Nanauta, Saharanpur on 3.8.2023 at 5:15 am. As per medical report, the injured received four lacerated wound and x-ray was advised and done at SBD hospital, Saharanpur from where he was referred to Maulana Mahmood Hasan Medical College, Saharanpur and then he was referred to PGI Chandigarh where his treatment was done and thereafter his treatment was going on in the house on the advise of doctor. Suddenly, on 21.9.2023 the condition of injured Naushad was become serious and he was being brought to PGI Chandigarh, he died on the way on 21.9.2023. The investigating officer carried out the investigation and submitted charge-sheet against the named accused Inam for charge under sections 302 IPC and section 3/25/27 of ARMS ACT .

4. Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that first bail application of the applicant filed under sections 307, 323 IPC and section 3/25/27 of ARMS ACT was allowed by the court vide order dated 20.9.2023. However, section 302 IPC was added during investigation and for that reasons, second bail application filed with regard to altered charge under section 302 IPC which was dismissed on 1.12.2023 by the court of session. However, this Court also dismissed bail application filed under section 302 IPC, therefore, another bail application, which was marked as second bail application no. 2615 of 2023 was filed before the trial court mainly on the ground that charge- sheet was filed in the case and same was not accompanied with ballistic examination report of FSL, wherein, one country made pistol of 12 bore and one empty cartridge shell of 12 bore and bullet recovered from the person of the deceased during his treatment in PGI Chandigarh and were sent for ballistic examination and same was deposited in FSL Niwari for examination as per statement of head constable Naresh Kumar. The accused is entitled to default bail envisaged under section 167(2)(a)(i) Cr.P.C. in view of filing of incomplete charge-sheet, which cannot be treated as charge-sheet for the purposes of section 167(2) Cr.P.C. even after lapse of 90 days, the statutory period, for which accused was incarcerated, FSL report was not filed. He is held in jail custody since 4.8.2023 i.e. for more than one year. He lastly submitted that learned trial court has committed legal error while dismissing the application for bail under section 167(2)(a) Cr.P.C. witho