IMPORTANT POINT
The court clarified that for offences under Section 467 IPC, the maximum period for filing a chargesheet is 90 days, thus denying the applicant's claim for default bail.

JUDGMENT :

Rakesh Thapliyal, J.

1. The present applicant is an accused in a case arising out of the First Information Report dated 16.09.2023, bearing FIR No. 0413 of 2023, P.S. Kotwali Dehradun, District Dehradun, wherein he has been implicated for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 read with Section 471 IPC.

2. Prior to registration of the FIR No. 0413 of 2023, he was taken into custody on 26.08.2023 in connection with another FIR No. 107 of 2023 and FIR No. 281 of 2023, both registered at P.S. Kotwali District Dehradun and the applicant was in judicial custody from 27.08.2023 in both the cases.

3. In both the FIRs i.e. FIR No. 107 of 2023 and FIR No. 281 of 2023, the applicant was granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 15.05.2024, passed in First Bail Application No. 2276 of 2023 and in Bail Application No. 2277 of 2023.

4. It is submitted that, though the applicant was granted bail by the coordinate Bench of this Court by order dated 15.05.2024; however, before the applicant could be released from jail, the Investigating Agency took the present applicant in judicial custody in the present case on 17.05.2024. Thereafter, the applicant moved bail application before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dehradun, which was rejected on 20.05.2024. Subsequently, the applicant approached to Sessions Judge, wherein a detailed report was filed by the Investigating Officer wherein it is reported that after the chargesheet filed against Swaran Singh and Amit Yadav, the name of the present applicant came to light during further investigation. Learned Sessions Judge reject the bail application of the applicant by order dated 29.05.2024.

5. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that, while the present applicant was in judicial custody from 16.09.2023 to 16.04.2024 in connection with two FIRs, bearing FIR No. 107 of 2023 and FIR No. 281 of 2023, he was taken on remand on 17.05.2024. Thereafter, the applicant moved an application for seeking default bail under Section 167(2) of CrPC and the same was rejected by the Chief Judicial Magistrate on 18.07.2024. Now, the present applicant is before this Court, seeking default bail under Section 167(2) of CrPC.

6. On 07.08.2024, the learned counsel for the applicant raised an issue by placing reliance on the judgment rendered by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Rakesh Kumar Paul Vs. State of Assam, 2017 (15) SCC 67 and by referring this judgment, he submitted that for grant of default bail the test would be the minimum sentence.

Consequently, the matter was posted and issue was framed, whether for the default bail, the test would be the minimum or the maximum sentence.

7. Learned counsel for the applicant by referring the judgment of Rakesh Kumar Paul (supra) submitted that in the said judgment, the majority opinion held that 90 days limit is only available in respect of the offences where a minimum 10 years imprisonment period is stipulated.

By placing this judgment, he also submitted that in the case of Rakesh Kumar Paul (supra), the Hon’ble Supreme Court also examined the view expressed by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the Case of Rajeev Chaudhary Vs. State (NCT of Delhi), 2001 (5) SCC 34.

8. At this juncture, for deciding the issue whether for default bail the test would be the minimum sentence or the maximum, the history behind the enactment of Section 167 of CrPC is also required to be elaborated which has also been discussed in the case of Rakesh Kumar Paul (supra) and it is also necessary to reproduce the history behind the enactment of Section 167 CrPC as discussed in paragraphs 10 to 17, which are being reproduced herein as under:-

History behind the enactment of Section 167 CrPC

10. The Code of Criminal Procedure enacted in 1898 contained Section 167 which laid down the procedure to be followed in the event the investigation into an offence is not completed within twenty-four hours. What is significant is that the legislat