Brief Facts
- The Accused were arrested on 14.05.2020 for alleged commission of offence under Section 3 of the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (‘PMLA’) and were remanded on the same date.
- On 11.07.2020 through e-mail, the Enforcement Directorate (‘ED’) claimed to file a Complaint and subsequently on 13.7.2020, i.e., a Monday, a physical copy thereof was tendered before the Court. The applications for enlargement of bail were moved on 13.07.2020. It was asserted by the respondents that the period of 60 days from the date of remand i.e., 14.5.2020, expired on 12.7.2020 (Sunday) and on the next day, the default bail applications were presented before the Court.
- The learned Special Judge, however, denied default bail to the respondents taking the view that the 60 day period would start from 15.5.2020, thereby excluding the date of remand (i.e. 14.5.2020).
- The High Court held that the filing of the Chargesheet by the ED on 13.7.2020, being the 61st day, would entitle the accused to default bail.
- These Appeals were against the order passed by the Bombay High Court, granting default bail to the respondents under proviso (a) (ii) of Section 167 (2) of the CrPC.
Issues
- Whether the day of remand is to be included for considering a claim for default bail under Section 167 CrPC ?
Held
- Supreme Court upheld the judgement passed by the High Court and has held that if the police is empowered to investigate an accused person on the day of the remand order itself, the 60/90 day stipulated period, upon whose expiry, the right of default bail accrues to the accused, should logically be calculated from that day itself. Ignoring the date of remand under Section 167 CrPC in the 60/90 day period, would in our opinion, militate against the legislative intent of providing an accused protection from being in prolonged custody, because of slothful investigation.
- In Ravindran Vs. Intelligence Officer, Director of Revenue Intelligence, (2021) 2 SCC 485 and Bikramjit Singh vs. State of Punjab, (2020) 10 SCC 616, which followed the Constitution Bench in Sanjay Dutt Vs. Bombay through C.B.I, 1994 (5) SCC 410, it was rightly held that if the accused persons avail their indefeasible right to default bail before the chargesheet/final report is filed, then such right would not stand frustrated or extinguished by any such subsequent filing. We therefore declare that the stipulated 60/90 day remand period under Section 167 CrPC ought to be computed from the date when a Magistrate authorizes remand. If the first day of remand is excluded, the remand period, as we notice will extend beyond the permitted 60 /90 days’ period resulting in unauthorized detention beyond the period envisaged under Section 167 CrPC. In cases where the chargesheet/final report is filed on or after the 61st/91st day, the accused in our considered opinion would be entitled to default bail. In other words, the very moment the stipulated 60/90 day remand period expires, an indefeasible right to default bail accrues to the accused.
Relevant Para No.
- 36, 50