Defective charge sheet filing beyond 180 days or to wrong court entitles accused to statutory bail under NDPS Act.

ORDER :

1. The present petition has been filed by the second accused in Crime No. 476 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police challenging the dismissal of his application filed under Section 187 (3) of BNSS seeking statutory bail.

(A) Facts leading to the filing of this petition are as follows:

2. The petitioner herein was implicated as the second accused in Crime No.476 of 2025 on the file of the respondent police on 11.06.2025 for the alleged offences under Section 8(c) read with Section 22(c) of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985. The petitioner was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 11.06.2025 itself.

3. As per Section 36-A(4) of NDPS Act, 1985 “90 days” occurring under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C shall be construed as reference to “180 days”. As per Section 167(2) Cr.P.C, magistrate has no jurisdiction to authorise detention of an accused in judicial custody beyond a period of 90 days ( has to reach as 180 days) in view of Section 36-A(4) of NDPS Act. Therefore, if the charge sheet is not laid on 180^th day, the accused person would be entitled to statutory bail. The petitioner herein having been remanded on 11.06.2025, the 180^th day falls on 07.12.2025 (including the date of order of remand).

4. According to the prosecution, the charge sheet laid on 07.12.2025 namely on 180^th day and LTN20220002624C202501073 was assigned. However, instead of e-filing the charge sheet before NDPS Act, it was wrongly uploaded to the Principal District Court, Madurai. The mistake was rectified and the charge sheet was laid before the NDPS Act on 09.12.2025. The accused person/petitioner had filed a statutory bail petition only on 09.12.2025 namely on 182^nd day. Therefore, when the statutory bail petition came up for hearing before the trial Court, the final report has already been filed. This submission of the prosecution was accepted by the trial Court and the trial Court proceeded to dismiss the statutory bail application. While dismissing, the trial Court also taken into consideration that the seized quantity is a commercial quantity and therefore, the Court is not inclined to allow the petition. Challenging the same the present petition has been filed under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023.

(B) Submissions of the learned counsels appearing on either side:

5. According to the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner, the charge sheet was laid on 07.12.2025 before a wrong forum. It should only be considered to be a defective charge sheet. The petitioner has filed his statutory bail application on 09.12.2025 even before the final report reached the Court. When the statutory benefit is accrued to the petitioner/accused, it cannot be taken away by filing the charge sheet on a subsequent date or subsequent time.

6. The learned Senior Counsel had further submitted that on 07.12.2025, only login was made and no documents were uploaded. The entire charge sheet and other enclosures were uploaded only on 08.12.2025 at about 13.18 hours even before the wrong forum. The said filing was rejected by the Principal District Court, Madurai only on 17.02.2026. The investigating agency has re-filed the charge sheet before NDPS Court only on 09.12.2025 i.e. on 182^nd day. Therefore, it should be construed that the charge sheet was laid only on 182^nd days. According to him, when the charge sheet and the statutory bail petition were filed on the same day, the fundamental rights have been accrued to the petitioner cannot be taken away and it should be construed in favour of the accused person that the default bail application had preceded in filing of the cha