Raja Bhaiya Singh vs State of M. P.

Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation

2021 Supreme(MP) 226

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
B.K. Shrivastava, J.
Raja Bhaiya Singh v. State of M.P.
Criminal Revision No. 1813 of 2020 (Jabalpur): against the order dated 25.4.2020 passed by the Special Judge (NDPS Act) Panna; Decided on 8.1.2021

Advocates:
Shreyas Pandit for applicant; Sanjeev Kumar Singh,
Panel Lawyer for respondent/State.

Headnote:
(1) Limitation -- filing of challan -- order dated 23.3.2020 of Supreme Court in Suo Motu W.P. (C) No. 3 of 2020 [reported in 2020 (2) JLJ June issue] related to extension of time limit -- not applicable for filing challan within 60 days or 90 days as prescribed under Cr.P.C. Suo Motu W.P. (C) No. 3 of 2020 reported in 2020 (2) JLJ June issue and 2020 (3) JLJ 251 (SC) followed. [Para 7]
(2) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- Ss. 397 and 167 (2) -- maintainability of revision -- order on application for default bail u/s. 167(2) of CrPC -- not interlocutory order -- decides valuable right of default bail finally at that stage -- revision tenable. AIR 1977 SC 2185, AIR 1978 SC 47 and AIR 1980 SC 962 followed. [Para 11]
(3) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S.167 (2) -- period for filing challan -- will run from date of order of remand -- "one day" will be complete on next day of remand -- first date of remand will be excluded- last date will be included -- period of temporary bail shall be excluded incomputing 90 days -- last date falling on Sunday or holiday will also be counted as 90th day. 1995 Supp (3) SCC 221, (1992) 3 SCC 141, (1996) 1 SCC 432, (2002) 2 SCC 121, 2011 AIR SCW 5551, AIR 1986 SC 2130 and AIR 1996 SC 2980 followed. 1993 JLJ 99, 1984 CrLJ 79, 2004 (2) MPHT 215, 2015 Cr.L.J. 1666, 2005 (3) MPLJ 306, ILR 2016 MP 2837 and 1991 (2) MPJR 338 relied on. [Para 19]
(4) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 -- S. 8(b) r/w S. 20(a)(i) -- Criminal P.C. 1973 -- S. 167 (2) -- limitation for filing challan -- offence u/s.8(b) r/w S. 20(a)(i) of NDPS Act is punishable by imprisonment upto 10 years, not minimum period of 10 years or death or life imprisonment -- limitation for filing challan will be 60 days, not 90 days or 180 days. (2017) 15 SCC 67 followed. [Para 28]
(5) Criminal P.C. 1973 -- Ss. 439 and 167 (2) -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 -- S. 8 (b) r/w S. 20 (a) (i) -- default bail -- "indefeasible right" of accused u/s. 167(2) -- cannot be curtailed by subsequent filing of challan even on same date -- challan not filed within prescribed limit of 60 days -- before filing of challan, applicant moved application for default bail -- trial Court had no discretion to dismiss application by saying that time was extended for filing challan -- by subsequent filing of challan, right of accused was not for feited. (1994) 5 SCC 410, 1995 Supp (3) SCC 221, AIR 2008 SC 78, 2011 AIR SCW 5551 and 2020 SCC Online 867 followed. (1994) 4 SCC 602, (2001) 5 SCC 453, (2017) 15 SCC 67, (1996) 1 SCC 718, (1996) 1 SCC 722, (2014) 9 SCC 457, (2011) 10 SCC 445 and 2021 (1) JLJ 62 SCC Online SC 824 referred to. [Paras 40 & 41]
¼1½ ifjlhek & pkyku dk Qkby fd;k tkuk & le; lhek c<+kus d¢ lacaèk esa Loçsj.kk ls fjV ;kfpdk ¼flfoy½ Øekad 3 lu~ 2020] 2020 ¼2½ ts ,y ts twu vad esa laçdkf'kr] esa mPpre U;k;ky; dk vkns'k fnukad 23-3-2020 & naM çfØ;k lafgrk d¢ vèkhu ;Fkk fofgr 60 fnol vFkok 90 fnol d¢ Òhrj pkyku d¢ Qkby fd, tkus d¨ ykxw ughaA 2020 ¼2½ ts ,y ts twu vad esa laçdkf'kr Loçsj.kk ls fjV ;kfpdk ¼flfoy½ Øekad 3 lu~ 2020 rFkk 2020 ¼3½ ts ,y ts 251 ¼,l lh½ vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 7½
¼2½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 397 rFkk 167 ¼2½ & iqujh{k.k dk pykus ;¨X; g¨uk & naM çfØ;k lafgrk dh èkkjk 167 ¼2½ d¢ vèkhu O;frØe tekur d¢ fy, vkosnu ij vkns'k & varoZrÊ vkns'k ugha & O;frØe tekur dk ewY;oku vfèkdkj ml çØe ij vafre :i ls fofuf'fpr djrk gS & iqujh{k.k ekU;A , vkb vkj 1977 ,l lh 2185] , vkb vkj 1978 ,l lh 47 rFkk , vkb vkj 1980 ,l lh 962 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 11½
¼3½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 167 ¼2½ pkyku Qkby djus dh vofèk & çfrçs"k.k d¢ vkns'k d¢ fnukad ls pysxh & ^^,d fnu^^ çfrçs"k.k ds vxys fnu iw.kZ g¨xk & çfrçs"k.k dh çFke rkjh[k N¨M+h tk,xh & vafre rkjh[k lfEefyr g¨xh & 90 fnol dh lax.kuk esa vLFkk;h tekur dh vofèk N¨M+h tk,xh & jfookj ;k vodk'k d¨ iM+us okyh vafre rkjh[k Òh 90 osa fnu d¢ :i esa fxuh tk,xhA 1995 lIyhŒ ¼3½ ,l lh lh 221 ¼1992½ 3 ,e lh lh 141] ¼1996½ 1 ,l lh lh 432] ¼2002½ 2 ,l lh lh 121] 2011 , vkb vkj ,l lh MCY;w 5551] , vkb vkj 1986 ,l lh 2130 rFkk , vkb vkj 1996 ,l lh 2980 vuqlfjrA 1993 ts ,y ts 99] 1984 lh vkj ,y ts 79] 2004 ¼2½ ,e ih ,p Vh 215] 2015 lh vkj ,y ts 1666] 2005 ¼3½ ,e ih ,y ts 306] vkb ,y vkj 2016 ,e ih 2837 rFkk 1991 ¼2½ ,e ih ts vkj 338 voyafcrA ¼iSjk 19½
¼4½ Lokid vkS"kfèk v©j eu% çÒkoh inkFkZ vfèkfu;e] 1985 & èkkjk 8 ¼[k½ lgifBr èkkjk 20¼d½ ¼1½ & naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 167 ¼2½ & pkyku Qkby djus d¢ fy, ifjlhek & Lokid vkS"kfèk vfèkfu;e dh èkkjk 8 ¼[k½ lgifBr èkkjk 20¼d½ ¼1½ d¢ vèkhu vijkèk 10 o"kZ d¢ dkjkokl ls naMuh; gS] U;wure 10 o"kZ dh vofèk d¢ dkjkokl ;k e`R;qnaM ;k vkthou dkjkokl ls ugha & pkyku Qkby djus d¢ fy, ifjlhek 60 fnol dh g¨xh] 90 fnol ;k 180 fnol dh ughaA ¼2017½ 15 ,l lh lh 67 vuqlfjrA ¼iSjk 28½
¼5½ naM çfØ;k lafgrk] 1973 & èkkjk 439 rFkk 167 ¼2½ & Lokid vkS"kfèk v©j eu% çÒkoh inkFkZ vfèkfu;e] 1985 -- èkkjk 8 ¼[k½ lgifBr èkkjk 20 ¼d½ ¼1½ & O;frØe tekur -- èkkjk 167 ¼2½ d¢ vèkhu vfÒ;qDr dk ^^vts; vfèkdkj^^ & mlh fnukad d¨ Òh] ckn esa pkyku Qkby fd, tkus d¢ dkj.k de ugha fd;k tk ldrk & pkyku 60 fnol dh fofgr vofèk d¢ Òhrj Qkby ugha & pkyku Qkby fd, tkus d¢ iwoZ] vkosnd us O;frØe tekur d¢ fy, vkosnu fd;k & fopkj.k U;k;ky; d¨ ;g dgdj vkosnu [kkfjt djus dk foosdkfèkdkj ugha Fkk fd pkyku Qkby djus d¢ fy, le; c<+k fn;k x;k Fkk & ckn esa pkyku Qkby fd, tkus ls vfÒ;qDr dk vfèkdkj leig~r ugha g¨ x;kA ¼1994½ 5 ,l lh lh 410] 1995 lIyhŒ ¼3½ ,l lh lh 221 , vkb vkj 2008 ,l lh 78] 2011 , vkb vkj ,l lh MCY;w 5551 rFkk 2020 ,l lh lh vkWuykbu 867 vuqlfjrA ¼1994½ 4 ,l lh lh ¼2001½ 5 ,l lh lh 453] ¼2017½ 15 ,l lh lh 67] ¼1996½ 1 ,l lh lh 718] ¼1996½ 1 ,l lh lh 722] ¼2014½ 9 ,l lh lh 457] ¼2011½ 10 ,l lh lh 445 rFkk 2021 ¼1½ ts ,y ts 62 fufnZ"VA ¼iSjk 40 ,oa 41½

ORDER

1. This criminal revision has been preferred on 24.7.2020 by applicant Raja Bhaiya Singh against the order dated 25.4.2020 passed by the Special Judge, NDPS, Panna, District Panna in connection with Crime No.270/2019, registered at Police Station Simariya, District Panna under section 8/20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”).

2. By the impugned order the learned trial Court dismissed the application filed under section 167(2) of CrPC on behalf of accused for default bail upon the ground that challan has not been filed within 60 days from the arrest of accused/applicant.

3. It appears from the record that the petitioner was arrested on 13.2.2020 and on the same date he was produced before the concerned Court, by which he was sent to judicial custody. The applicant moved an application under section 167(2) of CrPC on 21.4.2020 and the challan was also filed by the police on the same date. It appears from the impugned order that the trial Court received the aforesaid application for default bail on 2:32 p.m. through whatsapp message upon the personal mobile number of concerned judicial officer (as per Circular No.P-33 dated 20.4.2020 issued by the District Judge, Panna). It is also mentioned in the impugned order that the challan was filed at 3:50 p.m on the same date i.e. 21.4.2020.

4. The trial Court dismissed the aforesaid application in the light of order dated 23.3.2020 passed by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in Writ Petition No.3/2020. The trial Court mentioned the following observation of Supreme Court :-

“this Court has taken suo motu cognizance of the situation arising out of the challenge faced by the country on account of covid-19 virus and resultant difficulties that may be faced by litigants across the country in filing their petitions/applications/suits/appeals/all other proceedings within the period of limitation prescribed under the general law of limitation or under special law (both central and/or state).”

Upon the basis of aforesaid observation, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the prescribed time limit of 60 days for filing the challan has already been extended by the aforesaid order of Hon’ble the Supreme Court. Therefore, the application is not tenable.

5. It is submitted by the counsel for applicant that the trial Court committed mistake by mentioning that the time limit for default bail has been extended. On the other side, the Sate supported the view of the trial Court and it is submitted by the State that the challan has been filed within the period of limitation because the limitation was extended by the Supreme Court.

6. In reference to the aforesaid controversy, it will be useful to refer the judgment dated 19.6.2020 passed by the three Judges Bench of Hon’ble the Supreme Court in S.Kasi v. Through the Inspector of Police, reported in 2020(3) JLJ 251 = 2020 SCC Online SC 521. In the aforesaid case, the Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that :-

“The indefeasible right to default bail under section 167(2) is an integral part of the right to personal liberty under Article 21, and the said right to bail cannot be suspended even during a pandemic situation as is prevailing currently. It was emphasized that the right of the accused to be set at liberty takes precedence over the right of the State to carry on the investigation and submit a chargesheet.”

The Supreme Court considered the aforesaid extension of time and finally came to the conclusion as under :-

“We, thus, are of the view that neither this Court in its order dated 23.3.2020 can be held to have eclipsed the time prescribed under section 167(2) of CrPC nor the restrictions which have been imposed during the lockdown announced by the Government shall operate as any restriction on the rights of an accused as protected by section 167(2) regarding his indefeasible right to get a default bail on non-submission of chargesheet within the time prescribed.”

7. Therefore, it appears that the ord