The filing period for a charge sheet is 60 days for offences with penalties under ten years, entitling the accused to bail upon default.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH AT INDORE BEFORE HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE GAJENDRA SINGH rd ON THE 3 OF JULY, 2025 CRIMINAL REVISION No. 2810 of 2025 SUMIT SODE @ JODHA Versus THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH Appearance:

Shri Vikas Rathi - Advocate for the petitioner.

Shri Rahul Solanki - G.A for the respondent/State.

ORDER This criminal revision under section 438 r/w section 442 of the BNSS, 2023 is preferred challenging the legality of the order dated 13.06.2025 by Special Judge (NDPS Act), Dewas whereby application for bail preferred under section 187(3)(i) of the BNSS, 2023 has been rejected.

2. Facts in brief are that revision petitioner was arrested on

13.04.2025 in crime no.257/2025 registered at PS Kothwali, Dewas in connection with section 20 r/w section 8 of the NDPS Act, 1985 for possessing 1.612 kg. ganja. The revision petitioner was produced before the JMFC, Dewas on 14.04.2025 and the revision Signature Not Verified Signed by: HARIKUMAR petitioner preferred an application on 13.06.2025 submitting that he is entitled for bail as the final report has been submitted in the case and the offence committed by the revision petitioner is punishable up to 10 years RI with fine of Rs.1 lakh and the period for filing the charge sheet is 60 days.

3. The impugned order discloses that the charge sheet was filed at 3.50 p.m of 13.06.2025 and the case diary was produced on the same day for disposal of the application. The trial court rejected the application recording the finding that the offence against the revision petitioner falls within the ambit of section 20(b)(ii)(b) r/w section 8 (c) of the NDPS Act, 1985 which provides a punishment for 10 years RI and a fine of Rs.1 lakh and the provision of section 187(3) of the BNSS, 2023 applies which provides a period of 90 days for investigation whereas the charge sheet has been filed on the

61st day.

4. Challenging the order, this revision petition is preferred on the ground that trial court did not apply its mind when dismissing the application of the present revision petitioner and has wrongly appreciated the law as the alleged seized quantity is less than commercial quantity and the punishment of which is up to 10 years whereas accused person deserves to be enlarged on bail if the charge sheet is not filed within 60 days. The provision of 90 days is Signature Not Verified Signed by: HARIKUMAR applicable in cases where the offence is punishable with imprisonment of minimum ten years or more.

5. Heard.

6. State has supported the impugned order and prayed for dismissal of the petition.

7. In this case the facts are not in dispute and only interpretation of section 187(3) of the BNSS, 2023 is to be decided in this revision petition. For convenience, section 187(3) of the BNSS, 2023 is being reproduced as under:

187. (1) xxxxx xxxxxx (2) xxxxx xxxxxx (3) The Magistrate may authorise the detention of the accused person, beyond the period of fifteen days, if he is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for doing so, but no Magistrate shall authorise the detention of the accused person in custody under this sub-section for a total period exceeding— (i) ninety days, where the investigation relates to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less than ten years;

(ii) sixty days, where the investigation relates Signature Not Verified Signed by: HARIKUMAR to any other offence, and, on the expiry of the said period of ninety days, or sixty days, as the case may be, the accused person shall be released on bail if he is prepared to and does furnish bail, and every person released on bail under this sub-section shall be deemed to be so released under the provisions of Chapter XXXIV for the purposes of that Chapter.

8. The High Court of Karnataka in the case of State of Karnataka vs. Kalandr Shafi S/o Late