The statutory right given to the accused under Section 437(6) of Cr.P.C. cannot be taken away based solely on previous criminal antecedents.

JUDGMENT :

Rajendra Kumar Srivastava, J.

Heard through Video Conferencing.

1. This petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. against the order dated 29/07/2020 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Umariya, in Criminal Revision No. 09/2020, whereby the learned Sessions Judge rejected the applicant's revision petition and affirmed the order dated 29/06/2020 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Umariya in Criminal Case No. 656/2019, whereby the learned CJM rejected the applicant's application filed under Section 437(6) of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail.

2. It appears from the record that applicant is facing trial in Criminal Case No. 656/2019 which is pending before the CJM, Umariya for the offence punishable under Sections 34 (2) of M.P. Excise Act.

3. Prosecution case, in short, is that, on 17.10.2019 Sub-Inspector Nowrozabad, received an information that some persons are transporting liquor without valid permit, thereafter, police officials reached the spot. Present applicant-accused was coming on a motor cycle. He was stopped and the motor cycle was checked and 54 bulk litres of country made liquor was seized from his possession. Pursuant to that, FIR was registered under Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act. Thereafter, charge-sheet has been filed on 10.12.2019 and charge was framed on 07.03.2020 under Section 34(2) of M.P. Excise Act. Case was fixed for prosecution evidence on 03.04.2020. Prosecution did not close the prosecution evidence within 60 days, thereafter on 29.06.2020 applicant accused filed an application under Section 437 (6) of Cr.P.C. Learned trial court dismissed the application on the ground that applicant-accused has previous criminal antecedents, so he is not entitled to get benefit under Section 437(6) of Cr.P.C. Thereafter, applicant accused filed a revision against this order but learned Additional Sessions Judge also dismissed his revision.

4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that learned trial court and revisional court did not consider the legal position in perspective way. Section 437 (6) of Cr.P.C. make it obligatory on the part of the trial court to conclude the trial within a period of 60 days from the first date fixed for recording evidence and if the Court fails in that, then accused is entitled for bail. This statutory right cannot be taken away in such fashion. So it appears that the order of trial court or revisional court is not according to law, so he prays to set-aside the orders and also the applicant-accused be released on bail. In support of his contention learned counsel for the applicant relied upon the judgments passed in Rajendra Pralhadrao Wasnik Vs. state of Maharashtra (2019) 12 SCC 460 and Maulana Mohd. Amir Rashadi vs State of U.P. & Anr. 2012 (2) SCC 382.

5. Learned counsel for the State opposed the prayer.

6. A Division Bench of this in the case of Devraj Maratha @ Dillu Vs. State of M.P. in M.Cr.C. No. 2668/2018 vide order dated 16.03.2018 has held as under:-

11. Regard being had to the submissions advanced on behalf of the parties, it is apposite to refer the provision of sub-section (6) of Section 437 of the Code. The same is reproduced hereunder :-

"S. 437. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence.-

(1) xx xx xx

(2) xx xx xx

(6) If, in any case triable by a Magistrate, the trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case, such person shall, if he is in custody during the whole of the said period, be released on bail to the satisfaction of the Magistrate, unless for reasons to be recorded in writing, the Magistrate otherwise directs.

12. Upon a bare perusal of the aforesaid provision and a close scrutiny thereof, it is noted that sub-section (6) of Section 437 of the Code is in two parts. First - if, in any case triable by a Magistrate, the trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of six