Victim Has Locus To Request Court To Summon Witnesses Under Section 311 CrPC In State Prosecution: Allahabad High Court Order 2 Rule 2 CPC Cannot Be Ground to Reject a Plaint: Supreme Court Draws Crucial Distinction Between Bar to Sue and Bar by Law No Right to Lawyer Before Advisory Board in Preventive Detention — Unless Government Appears Through Legal Practitioner: Supreme Court Wife's Dowry Statement Cannot Be Used to Prosecute Her for 'Giving' Dowry: Supreme Court Upholds Section 7(3) Shield Husband's Loan Repayments Cannot Reduce Wife's Maintenance: Supreme Court Raises Amount to ₹25,000 From ₹15,000 Prisoners Don't Surrender Their Rights at the Prison Gate: Supreme Court Issues Binding SOP to End Delays in Legal Aid Appeals A Judgment Must Be a Self-Contained Document Even When Defendant Never Appears: Supreme Court on Ex Parte Decrees Court Cannot Dismiss Ex Parte Suit on Unpleaded, Unframed Issue: Supreme Court Sets Aside Specific Performance Decree Denied on Title Erroneous High Court Observations Cannot Be Used to Stake Property Claims: Supreme Court Steps In to Prevent Misuse of Judicial Observations No Criminal Proceedings Would Have Been Initiated Had Financial Settlement Succeeded: Supreme Court Grants Anticipatory Bail In Rape Case Directors Cannot Escape Pollution Law Prosecution by Claiming Ignorance: Allahabad High Court Refuses to Quash Summons Against Company Directors Order 7 Rule 11 CPC | Court Cannot Peek Into Defence While Rejecting Plaint: Delhi High Court Death 3½ Months After Accident Doesn't Break Causal Link If Doctors Testify Injuries Could Cause Death: Andhra Pradesh High Court LLB Intern Posed as Supreme Court Advocate, Used Fake Bar Council Card and Police Station Seals to Defraud Victims of Rs. 80 Lakhs: Gujarat High Court Rejects Anticipatory Bail Husband Who Travels to Wife's City on Leave, Cohabits With Her, Then Claims She 'Never Lived With Him' Cannot Prove Cruelty: Jharkhand High Court Liquor Licence Is a State Privilege, Not a Citizen's Right — No Vested Right of Renewal Survives a Change in Rules: Karnataka High Court Sets Aside Stay on E-Auction Policy Court Holiday Cannot Save Prosecution From Default Bail: MP High Court No Search At Your Premises, No Incriminating Document, No Case: Rajasthan HC Quashes Rs. 18 Crore Tax Assessment Under Section 153C Limitation Act | Litigant Cannot Be Punished For Court's Own Docket Load: J&K High Court

Punjab and Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail to Accused in NDPS Case due to Investigating Agency's Default

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Chandigarh, May 22, 2023: In a significant development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided by Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, has granted default bail to the accused in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) case. The order was passed in Criminal Revision Petition No. 1850 of 2022 (O&M) on May 22, 2023.

The case involved the petitioner, Rajpal alias Billu, who was charged under Sections 20 and 25 of the NDPS Act, 1985. The petitioner had filed an application for default bail under Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) after his previous application was dismissed. The dismissal was based on the extension of the period for the presentation of the challan (charge sheet) by the investigating agency.

According to the facts presented in the judgment, the police received secret information regarding the transportation of a heavy quantity of charas by the accused and two others in a black Tata Harrier car. Upon intercepting the vehicle, two individuals were arrested, and a significant amount of charas was recovered. The petitioner was identified as Rajpal alias Billu, while the other individual managed to escape.

The petitioner's arrest took place on February 13, 2022, and the period of 180 days for presenting the charge sheet was set to expire on August 11, 2022. The investigating officer sought an extension for the presentation of the charge sheet, which was granted for an additional 90 days. However, the High Court, in a separate case (CRR-1907-2022), had recently set aside the order granting the extension.

During the hearing, the petitioner's counsel argued that since the extension order had been declared invalid, the petitioner was entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. The State counsel did not dispute this contention.

Justice Jasjit Singh Bedi, while referring to the relevant provisions of law, including Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act and Section 167(2) proviso (a) of the Cr.P.C., observed that an accused has an indefeasible right to be released on bail if the investigating agency fails to complete the investigation and file the charge sheet within the prescribed period. In light of the High Court's decision to set aside the extension order, the further detention of the petitioner would be in violation of the statutory provisions.

Accordingly, the High Court allowed the revision petition and set aside the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehabad, which had dismissed the petitioner's application for default bail. The Court ordered the release of the petitioner on bail to the satisfaction of the Trial Court or Duty Magistrate concerned.

As part of the bail conditions, the petitioner is required to appear before the police station concerned on the first Monday of every month and provide written confirmation that he is not involved in any other criminal activity. Additionally, the petitioner or someone on his behalf must prepare a fixed deposit receipt (FDR) of Rs.1,00,000/-, to be deposited with the Trial Court. Failure to comply with the bail conditions may result in the forfeiture of the deposited amount.

The judgment reaffirms the importance of the accused's right to default bail in cases where the investigating agency fails to complete the investigation and present the charge sheet within the stipulated period. The ruling highlights the need for timely completion of investigations to safeguard the fundamental rights of the accused.

Decided on: 22.05.2023

Rajpal @ Billu vs State of Haryana 

Latest Legal News