The right to default bail is an indefeasible right available only until a charge sheet is filed. Once a charge sheet is submitted within the statutory period, the right to default bail is extinguished, and subsequent investigation under Section 173(8) does not render the charge sheet incomplete.

Reportable

Judgment

1. The instant bail cancellation application under section 439(2) of CrPC is filed by State of Rajasthan aggrieved from order dated 23rd November 2022 in Case CIS No. 3697/2022, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge No.6, Jaipur Metropolitan - II has granted bail under Section 167(2) of CrPC read with Section 439 of CrPC to respondent accused Rajeev Kumar Rana in FIR No. 24/2018, PS SOG, Jaipur, for the offence under Sections 420, 409, 406, 467, 468, 471, 477-A, 120-B and 201 of IPC and Section 5 of the Prize Chits and Money Circulation Scheme (Banning) Act, 1978 and Section 65 of IT Act, 2000.

2. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the respondent accused was arrested on 13th April 2022 and a charge sheet filed on 8th July 2022 and there was no reason to consider default bail under Section 167(2) of CrPC. He also submitted that learned Additional Sessions Judge has mentioned the fact in para six of the impugned order that charge sheet 11B/19 dated 08.07.2022 is filed. He also submitted that the application under Section 167(2) is filed only after filing of charge sheet but the learned Additional Sessions Judge considered the charge sheet as incomplete and on basis of incomplete charge sheet, has drawn a conclusion that it cannot be treated as a charge sheet under the law, therefore, granted bail to respondent accused by invoking a default bail clause under Section 167 (2) of CrPC. He submitted that the analogy of learned Additional Sessions Judge is not only contrary to law but also against the settled proposition of law.

3. Aforesaid contentions were opposed by learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent accused and submitted that the bail was granted on 23.11.2022 and since then the petitioner is availing liberty granted to him and cancellation application is considered after four years is nothing but an abuse of process of law. He further referred judgment in case of Guria, Swayam Sevi Sansthan Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others : (2009) 15SCC 75, and submitted that a bail which has been granted in the year 2022 cannot be cancelled in the year 2026 on any of the ground.

4. Learned counsel has further referred judgment in the cases of Fakhrey Alam Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh : (2021) 20 SCC 636 and Kamlesh Chaudhary Vs. The State of Haryana : Criminal Appeal No. 15/2021 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No.5715/2020) and submitted that if a charge sheet is not complete in all respect and still the investigation is kept pending against the same accused, then neither the cognizance can be taken nor a trial be proceeded, and in such eventuality, a default bail under Section 167(2) of CrPC can be granted and a person cannot be re-arrested on the ground that a subsequent charge sheet is filed. He also submitted that the first charge sheet on 08.07.2022 was in fact no charge sheet and same was not considered as a charge sheet under Section 173 of CrPC by the Court and the petitioner has no role in analogy adopted by the Court, therefore, he is