Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh 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