Case Note & Summary
The petitioners, Ranganth Tulshiram Galande and Anil Zumbarrao Darekar, were arrested on 07.07.2025 in connection with Crime No. 673 of 2025 registered at Shrigonda Police Station for offences under Sections 316(2), 318(2), 318(4) read with 3(5) of the Bhartiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) and Section 3 of the Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 (MPID Act). Under Section 187(3) of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), the charge-sheet was required to be filed within 60 days, i.e., by 05.09.2025. The police failed to file the charge-sheet within that period. The petitioners applied for default bail before the Sessions Court. Meanwhile, the Investigating Officer submitted an application under Section 316(5) of the BNS, and the court merely recorded 'seen' on it without passing a reasoned order extending judicial remand. The Sessions Court rejected the default bail application, leading to the present writ petition. The High Court held that the right to default bail under Section 187(3) BNSS is a fundamental right that accrues upon expiry of the prescribed period if no charge-sheet is filed and no valid order extending remand is passed. The court noted that the requirement of a reasoned order recording satisfaction that adequate grounds exist for further remand is mandatory. The mere endorsement 'seen' on the application under Section 316(5) BNS does not satisfy this requirement. The court also observed that the MPID Act does not contain any provision overriding the default bail provisions of the BNSS. Accordingly, the High Court allowed the petition, set aside the Sessions Court's order, and directed that the petitioners be released on default bail on such terms and conditions as the Sessions Court may impose.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Default Bail - Section 187(3) BNSS - Right to default bail accrues if charge-sheet not filed within prescribed period and no reasoned order extending remand is passed - Held that mere marking 'seen' on an application under Section 316(5) BNS does not constitute a valid extension of remand, and thus petitioners are entitled to default bail (Paras 6-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the petitioners are entitled to default bail under Section 187(3) of the BNSS when the charge-sheet was not filed within 60 days and the court merely recorded 'seen' on an application under Section 316(5) BNS without passing a reasoned order extending remand.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, set aside the Sessions Court order dated 09.09.2025, and directed that the petitioners be released on default bail on such terms and conditions as the Sessions Court may impose.
Law Points
- Default bail under Section 187(3) BNSS
- extension of remand requires reasoned judicial order
- Section 316(5) BNS does not extend investigation period for default bail
- MPID Act does not override BNSS for default bail
