Kamlesh Chaudhary v. The State of Rajasthan (SC)
(2021) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15799
From the Database of www.lawtodaylive.com
Supreme Court of India
Before: L. Nageswara Rao, Navin Sinha & Indu Malhotra, JJ.
Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 2021
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 5715 of 2020)

Decided on: 05.01.2021
Kamlesh Chaudhary - Appellant(s)
Versus
The State of Rajasthan - Respondent

For Petitioner(s):

Mr. S. Hari Haran, Adv., Ms. Jaikriti S. Jadeja, AOR

For Respondent(s):

Mr. Ashish Kumar, AAG. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 167(2), 437, 439 -- Default bail – Appellant held entitled for bail u/s 167 Cr.P.C., however High Court ordered that he can be re-arrested after charge sheet is filed – Held, filing of charge sheet by itself cannot be a ground for cancellation of bail.

(Para 2, 5)

Cases referred:

1. Bashir v. State of Haryana, (1977) 4 SCC 410.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant 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 IT Act. He was arrested on 25.05.2019. Incomplete charge sheet was filed on 22.07.2019. 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.

3. Mr. S. Hari Haran, learned 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 this Court in Bashir v. State of Haryana [(1977) 4 SCC 410]. In the said judgment, this Court held that it is open to the prosecution to file an application for cancellation of bail on the grounds known to law and the receipt of the charge sheet in Court can by itself be no ground for cancellation of bail.

4. Mr. Ashish Kumar, learned 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.

5. It is clear from the judgment of this Court in Bashir’s case (supra) that filing of charge sheet by itself cannot be a ground for cancellation of bail. Bail granted under Section 167 Cr.P.C. can be cancelled on other grounds available in law to the prosecution.

6. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the finding recorded in paragraph 17 of the judgment of the High Court is set aside.

7. The criminal appeal stands disposed of.

Order accordingly.

********

www.lawtodaylive.com
Kamlesh Chaudhary v. The State of Rajasthan (SC)
(2021) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15799
From the Database of www.lawtodaylive.com
Supreme Court of India
Before: L. Nageswara Rao, Navin Sinha & Indu Malhotra, JJ.
Criminal Appeal No. 15 of 2021
(Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 5715 of 2020)

Decided on: 05.01.2021
Kamlesh Chaudhary - Appellant(s)
Versus
The State of Rajasthan - Respondent

For Petitioner(s):

Mr. S. Hari Haran, Adv., Ms. Jaikriti S. Jadeja, AOR

For Respondent(s):

Mr. Ashish Kumar, AAG. Mr. Milind Kumar, AOR

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 167(2), 437, 439 -- Default bail – Appellant held entitled for bail u/s 167 Cr.P.C., however High Court ordered that he can be re-arrested after charge sheet is filed – Held, filing of charge sheet by itself cannot be a ground for cancellation of bail.

(Para 2, 5)

Cases referred:

1. Bashir v. State of Haryana, (1977) 4 SCC 410.

ORDER

1. Leave granted.

2. The appellant 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 IT Act. He was arrested on 25.05.2019. Incomplete charge sheet was filed on 22.07.2019. 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.

3. Mr. S. Hari Haran, learned 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 this Court in Bashir v. State of Haryana [(1977) 4 SCC 410]. In the said judgment, this Court held that it is open to the prosecution to file an application for cancellation of bail on the grounds known to law and the receipt of the charge sheet in Court can by itself be no ground for cancellation of bail.

4. Mr. Ashish Kumar, learned 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.

5. It is clear from the judgment of this Court in Bashir’s case (supra) that filing of charge sheet by itself cannot be a ground for cancellation of bail. Bail granted under Section 167 Cr.P.C. can be cancelled on other grounds available in law to the prosecution.

6. In view of the aforesaid discussion, the finding recorded in paragraph 17 of the judgment of the High Court is set aside.

7. The criminal appeal stands disposed of.

Order accordingly.

********

www.lawtodaylive.com