Case Note & Summary
The appellant, S. Kasi, was arrested on 21.02.2020 in Crime No.495 of 2015 under Sections 457, 380, 457(2), 380(2), 411(2), and 414(2) IPC. He was lodged in Central Prison, Trichy. His bail application under Section 439 CrPC was rejected by the trial court on 30.04.2020. After 73 days in judicial custody, he filed Crl.OP(MD) No.5296 of 2020 before the Madras High Court seeking bail on the ground that the charge sheet had not been filed, entitling him to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC. The High Court dismissed the application, relying on the Supreme Court's order dated 23.03.2020 in Suo Motu W.P.(C) No.3 of 2020, which it interpreted as eclipsing all limitation periods, including the time prescribed under Section 167(2) CrPC. Aggrieved, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court examined the object of Section 167 CrPC, noting that it is a beneficial provision aimed at preventing indefinite detention and protecting personal liberty. The Court referred to precedents such as Uday Mohanlal Acharya v. State of Maharashtra and Rakesh Kumar Paul v. State of Assam, which held that the right to default bail is indefeasible and cannot be frustrated by the prosecution. The Court clarified that its order dated 23.03.2020 was intended to extend limitation periods for filing of documents, etc., but not to extend the period for filing charge sheets under Section 167(2) CrPC, as that would infringe upon the accused's right to liberty. The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and directed that the appellant be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Default Bail - Section 167(2) CrPC - Indefeasible Right - The appellant was arrested on 21.02.2020 and charge sheet was not filed within 60/90 days. The High Court erroneously held that the Supreme Court order dated 23.03.2020 eclipsed the time under Section 167(2). The Supreme Court clarified that the order does not extend the period for filing charge sheet, and the appellant's right to default bail had ripened. Held that the appellant is entitled to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond (Paras 8-14).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the appellant is entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC due to non-filing of charge sheet within the prescribed period, and whether the Supreme Court order dated 23.03.2020 extends that period.
Final Decision
Appeal allowed. Impugned judgment of Madras High Court dated 11.05.2020 set aside. Appellant directed to be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 25,000 with two sureties to the satisfaction of the trial court.
Law Points
- Default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC is an indefeasible right
- COVID-19 pandemic does not extend statutory period for filing charge sheet
- Supreme Court order dated 23.03.2020 does not eclipse Section 167(2) CrPC
