IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL REVISION No.348 of 2022

Arising Out of PS. Case No.-172 Year-2019 Thana- MANJHI District- Saran

======================================================

Bajrangi Singh @ Sandeep Singh @ Bajrangi Son Of Raju Singh Resident Of

Rawal Tola, P.S.-Chapra Town, District-Saran.

... ... Petitioner

Versus

The State of Bihar

... ... Opposite Party

======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s

:

Mr. Harish Kumar, Advocate

For the Respondent/s

:

Mr. Rajendra Prasad Nat, APP

======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 22-08-2022

Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned

counsel for the State.

2. This revision application has been preferred for

setting aside the order dated 23.03.2022 passed by learned 2^nd

Exclusive Special Excise Court, Saran at Chapra whereby and

whereunder the learned court has been pleased to reject the prayer

for ‘default’ bail of the petitioner under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. in

connection with Manjhi P.S. Case No. 172 of 2019 registered

under Sections 30/30(a)/38(i)(ii) of Bihar Prohibition and Excise

Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act of 2016’).

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per

the prosecution story, in course of checking of the vehicle in

question a total 1664.73 liters of foreign liquors were recovered

from the truck. The apprehended accused disclosed their names as

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.348 of 2022 dt.22-08-2022

2/12

well as the names of the other accused persons. This petitioner has

been named as one of those persons to whom the supply of liquor

was to be made.

4. Learned counsel submits that it is a case of false

implication of the petitioner on the basis of the alleged statement

of the truck driver. It is his submission that in similar manner, the

petitioner has been made accused in about 14 cases.

5. Learned counsel submits that so far as this revision

application is concerned, it has been filed assailing the impugned

order by which the learned court below has refused to enlarge the

petitioner on bail giving benefit of the provision of Section 167(2)

Cr.P.C. It is submitted that the petitioner was taken on remand in

the present case and had been sent to judicial custody on

21.01.2022. The copy of the order dated 21.01.2022 passed by the

learned court below has been enclosed with the petition as part of

the impugned order.

6. Learned counsel submits that under the Act of 2016

read with proviso (a)(ii) of Sub-Section (2) of Section 167 Cr.P.C.,

the investigating agency was required to submit a chargesheet

within a period of 60 days from the date on which the petitioner

has gone in judicial custody. It is submitted that the 60 days’

Patna High Court CR. REV. No.348 of 2022 dt.22-08-2022

3/12

period in this case expired on 22.03.2022 but no chargesheet was

filed within the given statutory period.

7. Learned counsel further submits that the petitioner

filed an application under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. availing his right

to get the privilege of default bail on 23.03.2022. Learned counsel

has drawn the attention of this Court towards the endorsement

made by the office of the learned court below on the margin of the

ordersheet wherein on 23.03.2022 at about 02:30 P.M. the office

reported to the learned Presiding Officer that no chargesheet has

been received in this case. Despite this, the learned court below

did not pass the order giving benefit of statutory bail to the

petitioner.

8. It is submitted that the application filed on behalf of

the petitioner was kept pending and at about 04:15 P.M. another

report was called for and this time, the office reported that

chargesheet has been filed at 04:15 P.M. Learned counsel submits

that it is evident from the endorsement made on the ordersheet of

the learned court below that no chargesheet was available