Supreme Court Upholds Respondents' Right to Default Bail in UAPA Case Due to Illegal Extension of Time for Charge Sheet. Extension of Time for Filing Charge Sheet Declared Invalid, Affirming Indefeasible Right to Default Bail Under Section 43D of UAPA.

In Favour of Accused
  • 52
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The dispute arose from a criminal appeal filed by the State of Maharashtra against a High Court judgment that granted default bail to the respondents. The respondents were arrested on 22nd September 2022 in connection with a First Information Report registered for offenses under the Indian Penal Code and the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967. Following their arrest, the respondents were remanded to police custody and subsequently to judicial custody, with the charge sheet due by 20th December 2022. The Special Judge granted extensions for filing the charge sheet, which the respondents challenged, arguing that the extensions were illegal and that they were entitled to default bail. The High Court agreed, stating that the extension of time was granted on invalid grounds, violating the respondents' right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court emphasized that the right to default bail is a fundamental right and cannot be forfeited by erroneous rejections of bail applications. The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's decision, reinforcing the principle that extensions for filing charge sheets must be based on valid legal grounds, and that the right to default bail is an indefeasible right of the accused once the statutory time limit is exceeded.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Default Bail - Right to Default Bail - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 167(2) - The court held that the right to default bail accrues when the investigating agency fails to file the charge sheet within the statutory time limit, and any extension granted without valid grounds violates this right. The High Court ruled that the extension of time for filing the charge sheet was illegal, thus entitling the respondents to default bail (Paras 39-40).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the extension of time granted for filing the charge sheet was legal and whether the respondents were entitled to default bail.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court upheld the High Court's ruling that the extension of time for filing the charge sheet was illegal and affirmed the respondents' right to default bail.

Law Points

  • default bail
  • extension of time
  • UAPA
  • Article 21
  • statutory rights
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2026 LawText (SC) (09) 78

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. OF 2026 (ARISING OUT OF SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 12932 OF 2024)

2026-09-21

Prashant Kumar Mishra J. Shree Chandrashekhar J.

2026 INSC 1021

State of Maharashtra

Momin Moiuddin Gulam Hasan @ Moin Mistri, Asif Aminul Hussain Khan Adhikari

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal regarding the legality of bail and extension of time for filing charge sheet.

Remedy Sought

The State of Maharashtra sought to challenge the High Court's order granting default bail.

Filing Reason

The respondents claimed entitlement to default bail due to failure to file the charge sheet within the statutory time limit.

Previous Decisions

The High Court had ruled that the extension of time for filing the charge sheet was illegal.

Issues

Legality of extension of time for filing charge sheet Entitlement to default bail under UAPA

Submissions/Arguments

The respondents argued that the extension of time was granted on invalid grounds, violating their right to default bail. The Public Prosecutor contended that the extension was necessary for obtaining sanction for prosecution.

Ratio Decidendi

The right to default bail is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution, and any extension of time for filing a charge sheet must be based on valid legal grounds.

Judgment Excerpts

The law provides an outer limit for completing the investigation. An extension of time can be asked only to complete the investigation. The right to default bail is a facet of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Procedural History

The State of Maharashtra filed a criminal appeal against the High Court's decision granting default bail to the respondents after challenging the legality of the extension of time for filing the charge sheet.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 167(2)
  • Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967: Section 43D, Section 45
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal by Legal Heirs of Plaintiff in Benami Property Dispute; Upholds High Court Finding That Sale Deed Was Not Benami Under Section 4(1) of Benami Transactions (Prohibition) Act, 1988. Court Holds That Absent Reconveyance Sa...
Related Judgement
Supreme Court Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal in Property Dispute Over Auction Sale — Upholds High Court's Finding That Auction Purchaser Was Real Owner, Not a Benami Front. The court held that the plaintiffs failed to prove that the auction purchaser was a benam...