Accused has no right to seek default bail till expiry of extended time to file chargesheet: High Court

feature-top

Read Order: GAGAN KUMAR v. STATE OF HARYANA 

Vivek Gupta

Chandigarh, July 22, 2021: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has junked a petition by an accused in a narcotics case who sought default bail saying the prosecution had failed to file the chargesheet within the prescribed period.  

The High Court held that the probe agency had sought extension of time to file chargesheet before the prescribed period of 180 days expired, on the ground that the FSL report was awaited, and the investigators were given two more months time to file the chargesheet in the case.

“No right enures to the benefit of the accused to seek default bail till the expiry of extended time. The application filed by him during the extended period is premature,” held a bench of Justice Suvir Sehgal.

On December 21, 2020, a two-wheeler which was being driven by Sanjay alias Munna with Gagan Kumar, the present petitioner, on pillion, was intercepted by the police and on checking, 700 strips containing 7,000 tablets of Tramadol Hydrochloride with a total weight of 3 kg 52 grams were recovered.

Both the accused were arrested and produced before the court the next day, when they were remanded to judicial custody.

An FIR dated December 21, 2020 was registered under Section 22 (c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 at Sadar Fatehabad police station.

The petitioners claimed that in terms of Section 36-A (4) of the NDPS Act, the investigating agency was required to file the final report within a period of 180 days, which was to expire on June 21, 2021.

On June 16, 2021, an application seeking extension of time was filed and allowed by the Special Court and two months’ more time was granted to the investigating agency beyond 180 days, i.e., beyond June 21, 2021, to submit the final report.

The accused petitioner filed an application seeking default bail on June 21, 2021, which after notice to the prosecution was dismissed by the Special Court.

Challenging the order of the special court in the High Court, the counsel for the petitioner has argued that the right to seek bail on account of default of the investigation is an indefeasible right and cannot be voided. He argued that the order granting extension of time to the investigating agency has been passed in violation of the provisions of NDPS Act.

Opposing him, the State counsel submitted that once the time for filing the chargesheet stood extended, the application seeking default bail cannot be entertained.

Deciding the matter, the bench stated that there is no merit in the Revision Petition of the accused. 

“The admitted position is that even before the prescribed period of 180 days expired, the Investigating Agency sought extension of time by filing an application under Section 36-A (4) of the NDPS Act, which was supported by the report of the Public Prosecutor, on the ground that the FSL report is awaited and it is likely to be ready on priority basis by the end of July 2021. This application was allowed on the day it was presented,” the HC held.

“No right enures to the benefit of the accused to seek default bail till the expiry of extended time. The application filed by him during the extended period is premature. Even if there is some erroneous observation by the Court regarding the co-accused that does not advance the case of the petitioner. The argument addressed by the counsel assailing the order dated 16.06.2021 cannot be looked into as the said order is not under challenge before this Court. In view of the above discussion, this Court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned order. Revision petition is dismissed,” held the court.

Add a Comment