IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AT HYDERABAD
K. SURENDER, J.
Karengula Srinivas - Petitioner
Versus
The State of Telangana through Bhadrachalam Town Police Station, rep. by Public Prosecutor - Respondent
Criminal Petition No. 7735 of 2021
Decided On : 08-04-2022
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Sections 437 and 439 - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 8(c) r/w Section 20(b) - Grant of Bail - Mandatory period of 180 days expired and charge sheet was not filed, as such, he is entitled for statutory bail as contemplated under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. - Unless orders are passed within the mandatory period of one hundred and eighty days, the accused shall have the right to be released on bail. (Para 9)
Finding of the Court :
Magistrate Courts as well as Special Courts shall not refuse to entertain the default/statutory bail application filed under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. on the ground that bail petition is pending adjudication in any other competent court under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C. and pass orders on the same day. However, a duty is cast upon the accused to inform the Court where the bail petition is pending under Sections 437 and 439 of Cr.P.C. about the petition filed under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.
Result : Allowed.
ORDER :
This criminal petition is filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.”) seeking enlargement of the petitioner/Accused No.3 in Crime No.375 of 2021 on the file of the Station House Officer, Bhadrachalam Town Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem, registered for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) r/w Section 20(b) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short ‘the NDPS Act’).
2. Heard Sri J.P.Srikanth, learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Assistant Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State and perused the record.
3. The facts of the case are that the petitioner is Accused No.3 in Crime No.375 of 2021 on the file of the Station House Officer, Bhadrachalam Town Police Station, Bhadradri Kothagudem, registered for the offence punishable under Section 8(c) r/w Section 20(b) of the NDPS Act. The case of the prosecution is that on 11.09.2021, the Bhadrachalam Town Police, while conducting search at the forest check post, stopped the car in which A1 to A3 were traveling and found 48 kgs of dry Ganja in the said car. A1 and A2 allegedly confessed that the same was purchased from A4 and A5 on the instructions of A6 and A7 at Dharakonda. The Police conducted panchanama and seized contraband of 48 kgs of Ganja. The petitioner/A3 was arrested and sent to judicial custody on 11.09.2021.
4. The only ground urged by the petitioner/A3 is that during the pendency of the present criminal petition, the mandatory period of 180 days expired and charge sheet was not filed, as such, he is entitled for statutory bail as contemplated under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.c. He further submits that the Police, Bhadrachalam filed petition under Section 36-A(4) of the Act of 1985, seeking extension of time for completion of investigation. Accordingly, the I Additional Sessions Judge, Khammam, by an order dated 15.03.2022 in Crl.M.P.No.220 of 2022 in the above crime, extended the period for completion of investigation by 180 days. However, the mandatory period of 180 days from 11.09.2021 expired on 09.03.2022 and the order granting further 180 days for completion of investigation was made on 15.03.2022, which is 186th day. In support of his contention, he relied on the order of this Court in Crl.P.No.8157 of 2021, dated 11.03.2022.
5. On the other hand, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submits that the application under Section 36-A(4) of the Act was made by the police on 178th day itself. However, the Court failed to pass orders and subsequently the orders came to be passed on 15.03.2022. For the said reason, the time is deemed to be extended and the right of bail under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C will not accrue to the petitioner/Accused No.3.
6. For the sake of convenience, Clause (4) of Section 36-A of the Act of 1985 reads as follows :
(1)(a)(b)(c) & (d)….
(2)….
(3)…
(4) In respect of persons accused of an offence punishable under Section 19 or Section 24 or Section 27-A or for offences involving commercial quantity the references in sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 thereof to “ninety days”, where they occur, shall be construed as reference to “one hundred and eighty days”;
Provided that, if it is not possible to complete the investigation within the said period of one hundred and eighty days, the Special Court may extend the said period up to one year on the report of the Public Prosecutor indicating the progress of the investigation and the specific reasons for the detention of the accused beyond the said period of one hundred and eighty days.”
7. A perusal of the aforesaid provision, the concerned court can extend time for a period up to one year when the Public Prosecutor indicates the progress of investigation and give reasons for the detention of the accused beyond 180 days.
8. Admittedly, the order of the trial Court came to be passed on 15.03.2022, which is 186th day. In Sanjay Dutt vs. Sta
Point of Law : Bail - Right of statutory bail under Section 167(2)Cr.P.C. is an indefeasible right.
An accused is entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. if charge sheet is not filed within 180 days as contemplated under Section 36-A(4) of the NDPS Act.
The failure of the prosecution to file a charge sheet within the stipulated time under Section 36(A) of the NDPS Act and Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. entitles the accused to default bail.
The right to bail is an indefeasible right of the accused and cannot be suspended even during a pandemic situation.
Where charge-sheet is not filed within 180 days as contemplated under Section 36-A(4) of NDPS Act and even within extended time, indefeasible right accrues to petitioners to seek bail under Section 1....
The right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. is an indefeasible right that cannot be suspended, even during a pandemic, and takes precedence over the State's right to carry out an in....
The accused's right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. remains enforceable, and the court must promptly decide on bail applications to prevent the prosecution from circumventing this right.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the accused's indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and the prosecutor's obligations in seeking extension of time under S....
The main legal point established is that the accused has an indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., and the court must take prompt action to enforce this right, restricting t....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.