PAWAN KUMAR AGRAWAL, SON OF RADHE SHYAM AGRAWAL Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH THROUGH STATE ECONOMIC OFFENCE WING

JUDGEMENT

(1.) With the consent of Learned Counsel appearing for the parties the revision is heard finally.

(2.) The instant revision has been preferred against the order dated 31.10.2018 passed by the Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act (henceforth 'the PC Act')/4th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur in Special Criminal Case No.186 of 2015, whereby the application filed by the present Applicant under Section 436-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of default bail has been rejected.

(3.) Facts of the case, in brief, are that the present Applicant was arrested on 20.3.2015 in connection with Crime No.5 of 2015 registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Chhattisgarh, Camp Bilaspur. On 15.6.2015, a charge-sheet for the offence punishable under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the PC Act and Sections 109, 120B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code was filed before the Special Court against the present Applicant as well as against the other co-accused persons, namely, Alok Agrawal, Abhish Swami, Radhe Shyam Agrawal, Smt. Pushpa Agrawal and Smt. Alka Agrawal. On 7.10.2016, charges have been framed against the present Applicant and the other co-accused persons by the Trial Court. Against co-accused Alok Agrawal, charges under Sections 13(1)(e) and 13(2) of the PC Act and Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code have been framed and against the present Applicant and the rest of the co-accused persons charges under Section 12 of the PC Act and Sections 109 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code have been framed. Regular bail applications under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure have already been rejected by this Court as well as by the Supreme Court. Since the charges framed against the present Applicant are under Section 12 of the PC Act and Sections 109 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code which are punishable by the maximum prescribed sentence of imprisonment for 7 years, on 22.9.2018, an application under Section 436-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed by the present Applicant for grant of default bail on the ground that he has already remained in custody for more than 31/2 years and, therefore, he is entitled to get default bail. A reply to the said application was filed by the prosecution before the Trial Court raising objection that during trial many applications were filed by the present Applicant to cause delay in trial which has resulted into delay in trial and, therefore, the present Applicant is not entitled to get default bail under Section 436-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure. It was also objected that according to the contents of the charges framed against the present Applicant, he is also liable to be charged for the offence punishable under Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code, but, inadvertently, that charge is not included in the order framing charges. It was submitted by the prosecution before the Trial Court that they will be filing an application for modification in the order framing charges against the Applicant. Since the offence punishable under Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code is punishable with imprisonment for life, the present Applicant is not entitled to get default bail under Section 436-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure.