POCSO Act | Foundational Facts Establishing Offence Must Be Proved To Trigger Statutory Presumption Under Section 29: Calcutta High Court Expectation Of Higher Price In Future Auctions No Ground To Discard Highest Bid Above Reserve Price; Subsequent Sale Hit By Section 52 TP Act: Allahabad High Court AI May Well Serve As Training Wheels But Entrusting It With Pilot's Seat Would Be Both Imprudent And Dangerous: Bombay High Court Appeal Against Acquittal Under Section 138 NI Act Can Be Dismissed For Non-Prosecution If Complainant Fails To Serve Notice On Accused: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejection Of Section 348 BNSS Witness Recall Plea Is Interlocutory; Inherent Powers Cannot Provide Backdoor Entry Where Section 438(2) Revisional Bar Applies Absent Gross Injustice: Delhi High Court Limitation Period For Appeal Commences From Date Assessee Receives Copy Of ITAT Order, Not Date Of Pronouncement: Bombay High Court Under Section 254(3) Income Tax Act Section 82 CrPC | Failure To Attempt Service At Known Overseas Address Vitiates Proclamation; Setting Aside PO Declaration Does Not Invalidate Arrest Warrants Or Extradition: Delhi High Court Expenditure Incurred By Defaulting Party Cannot Be Equated With Benefit Received Under Section 64 Contract Act: Karnataka High Court Upholds Setting Aside Of Arbitral Award Under Section 34 A&C Act Vendor Executing Agreement To Sell Pendente Lite Precluded From Compromising Appeal Prejudicially; Intending Purchasers Entitled To Impleadment Under Order 1 Rule 10 CPC: Madhya Pradesh High Court Kerala Rent Act | Examination Of Co-Landlord Spouse Sufficient To Prove Bona Fide Need Even If Spouse Intending To Occupy Doesn't Testify: High Court Personal Accident Coverage Under Motor Insurance Policy Does Not Extend To Borrower; Exonerates Insurer From Liability: Madras High Court Limitation To Challenge Void Sale Deed Runs From Discovery Of Fraud, Unilateral Material Alteration Vitiates Title: Orissa High Court Interim Status Quo Order Automatically Lapses Upon Dismissal Of Suit, Pendency Of First Appeal Does Not Entitle Injunction Under Order 39 CPC: Punjab & Haryana High Court District Caste Verification Committee Has No Jurisdiction Under Section 4C Karnataka SC/ST Act To Cancel Caste Certificate On Private Third-Party Complaint Absent Validation Request: Karnataka High Court Joint Title Presumes Equal Share Unless Exclusive Consideration Proved By Documented Evidence: Kerala High Court POCSO Act | Delay In Cross-Examination Of Prosecution Witnesses Does Not Weaken Sterling Testimony Of Victim: Madras High Court Mandatory Affixation Of Welfare Fund Stamp On Vakalatnama Valid Under List III Entries 23 & 26, Not A Toll On Right To Practice: Telangana High Court Upholds Sections 12 & 12A Of Advocates Welfare Fund Act BSF Personnel Certified Medically Incapacitated Entitled To Disability Pension Despite 'Voluntary Retirement' Label Under Rule 48-A CCS Rules: Punjab & Haryana High Court SARFAESI Auction Purchaser Takes Title Free From Subsequent Attachments, Claim Enquiry Confined Only To Property Rights: Kerala High Court Commercial Use, Late-Night Events In Areas Adjacent To Reserved Forest Prohibited To Protect Wildlife Under Forest Conservation Norms: Rajasthan High Court In Composite Negligence, Claimants Free To Recover Entire Compensation From Any Joint Tortfeasor Without Impleading Other Vehicle: Orissa High Court Regular Magistrate Lacks Jurisdiction Under Section 190 CrPC To Take Cognizance Against Sitting Or Former Legislators; Special MP/MLA Court Alone Competent: Karnataka High Court Specific Performance Cannot Be Decreed On Fabricated Sale Agreement Bearing Sequential Stamp Papers From Decade-Old Mortgage; Section 340 CrPC Applicable: Andhra Pradesh High Court Sole Testimony Of Child Victim Stands On Same Footing As Injured Witness, Defective Investigation No Ground To Discard Credible Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction U/S 6 POCSO Act, 376 IPC Once Trial Court Accepts Written Statement Without Objection, It Cannot Recall Order To Strike Off Defence Under Order 8 Rule 1: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Court Fee Refund Under Section 69 Or Section 69-A Of Tamil Nadu Court Fees Act If Out-Of-Court Settlement Is Reached After Trial Commences: Madras High Court

Default Bail No More As Easy As Earlier U/S 167(2) Cr.P.C. – New Guidelines - SC

07 May 2024 2:49 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court ruled  that if a strong case can be made from the chargesheet that the accused has committed a non-bailable crime, the bail granted under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. can be revoked.

Supreme Court held  "The bare filing of the chargesheet subsequent to a person being released on default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. cannot be a ground to cancel the bail of a person who is released on default bail,"

A case was first filed under Section 174 of the Criminal Procedure Code. A case was then filed in accordance with Section 302 read in conjunction with Section 120-B of the IPC.The respondent was detained by the State Police Agency and taken into judicial custody.

The 90-day waiting period was no longer valid. The respondent submitted a bail application for default bail in accordance with Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. on the very day after the 90-day period had expired.

The JMFC approved the default bail for the respondent. As per the decision, the respondent was freed on bail.

The C.B.I. then filed a supplementary chargesheet under Sections 201 and 120-B read with 302 and 201 I.P.C. against the defendant, D. Siva Shankar Reddy (A-5), as well as Sections 201, 506 and 120-B read with 201 I.P.C. against the respondent.]According to Section 439(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code, the C.B.I. filed a criminal petition with the High Court asking for the respondent's bail to be revoked.

The High Court dismissed the aforementioned petition primarily on the grounds that bail could not be revoked on the basis of merits after respondent No. 1 was freed on default bail pursuant to Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Whether the bail granted under the proviso to sub-section (2) of Section 167 Cr.P.C. for failing to wrap up the investigation within the time frame specified therein can be revoked after the presentation of a chargesheet, and if the answer to the question is yes, then what grounds and circumstances can the bail be revoked?

After citing a few cases, the Supreme Court stated that the issuance of a chargesheet after a person has been released on default bail pursuant to Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code cannot be used as justification for revoking that person's release. On the other hand, over and above other grounds on which the bail to a person who is released on bail can be cancelled on merits, upon filing of the chargesheet at the conclusion of the investigation, if a strong case is made out and on merits, it is found that he has committed a non-bailable offence/crime, taking into consideration Section 437(5) and Section 439(2) Cr.P.C.

The bench further opined that there is no absolute bar as stated and held by the High Court in the impugned judgement and order, which stated that once a person is released on default bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., his bail cannot be cancelled on merits and that it can be cancelled on other general grounds such as tampering with the evidence or witnesses; not cooperating with the investigating agency; and/or not cooperating with the concerned Trial Court, among others.

The Supreme Court stated that even if the accused committed a very serious offence, such as an NDPS violation or even a murder, he still managed to work with a convenient investigating officer, fail to submit the chargesheet within the allotted time period specified in Section 167(2) Cr.P.C., and obtain release on default bail, which could result in a premium being placed on illegality and/or dishonesty. Such release of the accused on default bail is based entirely on the proviso to subsection (2) of Section 167's proviso and not at all on the merits.

T. Gangi Reddy @ Yerra Gangi Reddy vs The State Through The Central Bureau of Investigation

Latest Legal News