Supreme Court Grants Default Bail Due to Investigation Delay

The Supreme Court, in its judgment dated September 24, 2018, in the case of Achpal @ Ramswaroop & Another vs. State of Rajasthan, ruled in favor of granting default bail to the accused due to procedural lapses in the investigation process. The case involved serious charges, including murder under Section 302 IPC, but the Court held that procedural fairness and the rights of the accused under Section 167(2) CrPC were paramount.

Background of the Case

The case originated from an FIR No.16 of 2018, registered on March 24, 2018, at Police Station Baharwanda Kalan, District Sawai Madhopur. The accused, Achpal @ Ramswaroop and another, were named in the FIR and arrested on April 8, 2018. They were remanded to police/magisterial custody from time to time.

During the investigation, the complainant filed a Criminal Miscellaneous Petition before the Rajasthan High Court, seeking a fair and impartial investigation. The High Court, on July 3, 2018, directed that the investigation be conducted by a Gazetted Police Officer, not below the rank of Additional Superintendent of Police, and the report be submitted within two months.

Failure to File Chargesheet Within 90 Days

Under Section 167(2) CrPC, the investigating agency is required to file a chargesheet within 90 days for offenses punishable with death, life imprisonment, or imprisonment for a term not less than ten years. In this case:

• The 90-day period expired on July 7, 2018.
• The police filed a chargesheet on July 5, 2018, but it was not in compliance with the High Court’s order.
• On realizing that the chargesheet was filed by an officer lower in rank than required, the complainant filed an objection.
• The Magistrate returned the chargesheet due to non-compliance with the High Court’s direction.
• By the expiry of the 90-day period on July 7, 2018, no valid chargesheet was on record.

Application for Default Bail

On the 91st day, July 8, 2018, the accused filed an application for bail under Section 167(2) CrPC, asserting their indefeasible right to bail due to the failure to file a valid chargesheet.

The Judicial Magistrate, Khandar, rejected the bail application on July 9, 2018, reasoning that:

• The chargesheet was filed before the 90-day period expired.
• The returning of the chargesheet was only a “technical issue.”
• The High Court’s order effectively extended the investigation period.

The accused then approached the Rajasthan High Court, which also rejected their bail plea on July 23, 2018, affirming that the High Court’s earlier order had implicitly extended the time for investigation.

Supreme Court’s Observations

The Supreme Court, comprising Justices Abhay Manohar Sapre and Uday Umesh Lalit, carefully examined the case and made the following key observations:

1. Right to Default Bail

The Court reaffirmed that if the investigating agency fails to file a valid chargesheet within the stipulated time, the accused has an indefeasible right to be released on bail.

“On the expiry of the said period of 90 days, an indefeasible right accrues in favor of the accused for being released on bail on account of default by the investigating agency in completing the investigation.”

2. Chargesheet Was Not on Record

Since the chargesheet was returned by the Magistrate due to non-compliance with the High Court’s direction, the Court held that, as of July 7, 2018, no valid chargesheet was on record.

3. High Court’s Order Did Not Extend Investigation Time

The Supreme Court rejected the argument that the High Court’s direction extended the investigation period:

“The Code does not contemplate any extension of the period within which the investigation must be completed, and the High Court’s order cannot be construed as extending such time.”

4. Accused Were Entitled to Bail

The Court ruled that the accused had filed their bail application immediately after the expiry of the 90-day period and had thus acquired an indefeasible right to bail.

“Once the accused avails of the right to default bail before a valid chargesheet is filed, the Court must grant bail.”

Final Judgment

The Supreme Court ruled:

• The appeal was allowed.
• The accused were entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC.
• The trial court was directed to grant bail on appropriate conditions.
• The prosecution was permitted to re-arrest the accused if new grounds arose.

Implications of the Judgment

This ruling has significant implications for criminal law and procedural fairness:

1. Protection of Accused’s Rights

The judgment reinforces that procedural lapses by the investigating agency cannot be used to deprive an accused of their statutory rights.

2. Importance of Timely Investigation

Law enforcement agencies must ensure that investigations are completed within the prescribed time to avoid the risk of default bail.

3. No Judicial Extension of Investigation Period

The ruling makes it clear that courts do not have the power to extend the statutory time limit for investigation unless specifically provided for by law.

4. Fair Trial and Due Process

By granting bail, the Court upholds the principle that the criminal justice system must balance investigation with the rights of the accused.

Conclusion

The Supreme Court’s decision in Achpal @ Ramswaroop & Another vs. State of Rajasthan is a landmark ruling that strengthens the rights of accused persons under Section 167(2) CrPC. The judgment highlights that procedural errors by the prosecution cannot override an accused person’s statutory rights. By granting default bail, the Court has reaffirmed the importance of fair trial and due process in criminal law.

Petitioner Name: Achpal @ Ramswaroop & Another.
Respondent Name: State of Rajasthan.
Judgment By: Justice Abhay Manohar Sapre, Justice Uday Umesh Lalit.
Place Of Incident: Rajasthan.
Judgment Date: 24-09-2018.

Don’t miss out on the full details! Download the complete judgment in PDF format below and gain valuable insights instantly!

Download Judgment: Achpal @ Ramswaroop vs State of Rajasthan Supreme Court of India Judgment Dated 24-09-2018.pdf

Direct Downlaod Judgment: Direct downlaod this Judgment

See all petitions in Bail and Anticipatory Bail
See all petitions in Custodial Deaths and Police Misconduct
See all petitions in SC/ST Act Case
See all petitions in Judgment by Abhay Manohar Sapre
See all petitions in Judgment by Uday Umesh Lalit
See all petitions in allowed
See all petitions in supreme court of India judgments September 2018
See all petitions in 2018 judgments

See all posts in Criminal Cases Category
See all allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all Dismissed petitions in Criminal Cases Category
See all partially allowed petitions in Criminal Cases Category