The Supreme Court held that the filing of a charge sheet by itself cannot be a ground for cancellation of bail.
The appellant, Kamlesh Chaudhary is accused of committing offences under Sections 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 477-A, 201, 120-B of IPC and Section 5 of the Prize Chits Money Circulation Scheme (Banning Act), 1978 and Section 65 of the Income Tax Act.
He was arrested on May 25, 2019. Incomplete charge sheet was filed on July 22, 2019. On the ground that charge sheet was not filed within the prescribed period, an application for bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. was filed by the appellant.
The High Court ruled in his favour by holding that the appellant is entitled to bail under Section 167 as a complete charge sheet was not filed within the prescribed period. While granting bail, the High Court held that the appellant can be re-arrested after the charge sheet is filed.
Mr. S. Hari Haran, counsel appearing for the appellant, submitted that the direction for re-arrest of the appellant on filing of the charge sheet is contrary to the law laid down by Apex Court in Bashir v. State of Haryana.
Mr. Ashish Kumar, Additional Advocate General for the State of Rajasthan, argued that the High Court has the power to impose any condition while granting bail under Section 437(3) and 439(2) of Cr.P.C. The grant of bail in this case is under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. and the submissions made on the basis of Sections 437 and 439 Cr.P.C. are not relevant.
The three-judge bench of Justice L.Nageswara Rao, Justice Nitin Sinha, and Justice Indu Malhotra held that filing of charge sheet by itself cannot be a ground for cancellation of bail and the bail granted under Section 167 Cr.P.C. can be canceled on other grounds available in law to the prosecution.Subscribe Taxscan AdFree to view the Judgment
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan AdFree. We welcome your comments at firstname.lastname@example.org