Repeating applications under S.437(6) of the Cr.P.C. for bail is not permitted after rejection.

1. Heard.

2. This petition has been brought under S.482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with a prayer to quash the impugned order passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kunkuri, District Jashpur, Chhattisgarh in Criminal Revision No. 6 of 2017 dated 29.3.2017, upholding the order of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Patthalgaon in Criminal Case No. 260 of 2015 refusing to grant bail to the petitioner under S.437(6) of the Cr.P.C.

3. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner is facing trial for the offences under S.409, S.420, S.120 - B read with S.34 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner was charged for the offences on 5.10.2015 and the first date of hearing was fixed on 14/10.2015 thereafter, the evidence of the prosecution could not be completed within a period of 60 days from 14.10.2015. An application was filed by the petitioner on 28.11.2015 under S.437(6) of the Cr.P.C. which was dismissed by the trial Court and a revision preferred against this order of dismissal i.e., Criminal Revision No. 16 of 2015, was also dismissed on 18.12.2015. It is also submitted that the first application of the petitioner was rejected on the ground that a period of 60 days was not completed when the application was filed. Crl. M. P. No.132 of 2016 brought before this Court against the order passed by the Sessions Court was dismissed accordingly, as the application filed by the petitioner was premature, the petition was dismissed and the petitioner was granted liberty to file a fresh application under S.437(6) of the Cr.P.C. before the trial Court.

4. The petitioner filed second application under S.437(6) of the Cr.P.C. before the trial Court, which was dismissed by order, dated 2.1.2016, against which Criminal Revision No. 1 of 2016 was filed before the Court of Sessions Judge, Jashpur and by order, dated 18.1.2016 the revision was dismissed. Subsequent to these orders passed by the trial Court and the Revisional Court, another application was filed by the petitioner under S.437(6) of the Cr.P.C. before the trial Court which was decided on 29.3.2017 by the trial Court vide Annexure - P / 2 and rejected the same. The revision preferred against this order i.e., Criminal Revision No. 6 of 2017 was decided by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Kunkuri, District Jashpur on 19.7.2017 and it was dismissed. Hence, this petition.

5. It is submitted by counsel for the petitioner that the provision under S.437(6) mandates that if the prosecution case is not completed within a period of 60 days from the first date of hearing, in that case accused becomes entitled for grant of bail. The orders passed by the trial Court and the Revisional Court below are bad in law and arbitrary. The petitioner is in jail since 11.5.2015 i.e., more than two years has passed even then the trial before the Court below has not been completed. For these reasons, the petitioner is entitled to be enlarged on bail.

6. Reliance has been placed in the case of Santosh Dubey v. State of Chhattisgarh , reported in 2017 (2) Cg.LJ 1 and the judgment of Allahabad High Court in the case of Arvind Kumar v. State of U.R , reported in Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 31262 of 2009 dated 8.1.2010.

7. Learned State counsel has opposed the main petition and the submissions made in this respect. It is submitted that the petitioner is charged with offences which have gravity and the trial is proceeding satisfactorily, hence, he is not entitled for grant of bail.

8. Heard both the parties and perused the documents on record.

9. On the basis of the submissions made, it