The right to default bail accrues if a charge-sheet is not filed within the statutory period, calculated from the date of remand, as affirmed by the Supreme Court.

ORDER

19.12.2024 Heard Mr. A.K Bhuyan, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. M. Haloi, Learned Standing Counsel, CBI.

2. This is an application u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakshya Sanhita, Case No. : Bail Appln./3626/2024

ORDER

19.12.2024 Heard Mr. A.K Bhuyan, Learned Counsel for the petitioner and also heard Mr. M. Haloi, Learned Standing Counsel, CBI.

2. This is an application u/s 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Surakshya Sanhita, 2023 filed by the petitioner namely, Smti. Sumi Borah, seeking regular bail in connection with Dibrugarh PS Case no. 352/2024 u/s 61(2)/238/316(2)/316(5)/318(4) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 r/w Section 21(1)/21(2)/21(3)/23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 (hereinafter BUDS Act), 2019 R/W Section 409/420/120(B) IPC.

Subsequently, registered as CBI Case no. RC 2212024E 0017.

3. The background of the case is that one FIR has been lodged by a police personnel stating that as reported by a news channel through its Facebook page, a video surfaced showing Bishal Phukan, a businessman from Dibrugarh allegedly involved in a financial scam in violation of RBI/SEBI regulations. According to the report, accused Bishal Phukan lured individuals entering into notarized agreements, promising high returns on investments and subsequently deposited their money into his personal demat account, contrary to SEBI guidelines.

4. During the course of investigation, several associates of Percelia Pharmaceutical Pvt. Ltd. and Percelia Consultancy, where Bishal Phukan held roles as Co-founder, Director and CEO, received summons including the present petitioner who is recognized as a sister of the prime accused Bishal Phukan.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that no offence u/s 316(2)/318(4) of BNS, 2023 r/w Section 21/23 BUDS Act is made out against the petitioner in view of the fact that no money has been received by her from the depositors or there is no allegation that she had induced someone by giving false assurance to deliver money to her and she is not even remotely connected with the allegations made in the FIR and as such, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail.

6. Learned Counsel for the petitioner also contended that the FIR named accused Bishal Phukan is not the biological brother of the petitioner but is only known to her whom she affectionately treats him as he is younger to her in age. Moreover, the accused petitioner never wanted a destination wedding in Rajasthan but Mr. Bishal Phukan forced to do the destination wedding and did all the expenditures accordingly, which does not amount to any crime, nor does it make the accused petitioner a criminal in any way.

7. According to Learned Counsel for the petitioner, the prime accused Bishal Phukan, whose name was in the FIR, was granted bail by this court and the husband of the petitioner, who was arrested on the same day along with the petitioner, was also granted default bail by this court. But the accused petitioner is still in jail and her name is not even mentioned in the FIR.

8. It is also the submission of Learned Counsel for the petitioner that the accused petitioner is subjected to default bail as the CBI failed to submit the charge-sheet within the stipulated time of 60 days and the accused petitioner has been languishing in judicial custody for more than 60 days. In view of the above as well as considering the length of detention, the petitioner may be enlarged on bail.

9. In support of his submission, learned counsel has relied on the following case laws-

(a)2023 Live Law (SC) 352(Ritu Chhabaria v. Union of India and others).

(b) Bail application no. 712 of 2023 (Irfan Moiuddin Saiyyed and others v. State of Maharashtra).

(c) Special leave to appeal (Crl) no. 9949/2023 (Ashok Kumar v. UT Chandigarh).

(d) 1996 (39) Drj 293 (Delhi ifghHiHigh Court) (Sukhram v. CBI)

(e)2012 (Vol. 1) SCC 40 (Sanjay Chandra v. CBI).

10. Per Contra, Learned Standing Counsel, CBI has vehemently opposed in granting bail to th