SUKHBIR SINGH Vs. STATE NCT OF DELHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INTRODUCTION

(2.) By way of this writ petition, the petitioner seeks to challenge the order dtd. 8/7/2025, passed by the learned ASJ-03/Special Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, vide which the petitioner's application for grant of default bail was dismissed. He further seeks to assail the order dtd. 13/6/2025, passed by the learned Vacation Judge, Patiala House Courts, New Delhi, extending the period of investigation as enabled under Sec. 21(2)(b) of MCOCA and also remanding the petitioner.

(3.) The premise on which the aforesaid reliefs have been sought is as follows - that while the general rule entitles an accused to default bail if the investigation is not completed within a period of sixty or ninety days (as the case maybe), MCOCA, being a special legislation, prescribes a default period of ninety days and empowers the Special Court to extend this period up to one hundred eighty days, provided the Public Prosecutor submits a report justifying the need for such extension. The case set up by the petitioner, and as canvassed by the learned senior counsel appearing on his behalf, is essentially that the extension of the period of investigation and the consequential remand of the petitioner vide order dtd. 13/6/2025 passed by the learned Vacation Judge is legally untenable, as Sh. Akhand Pratap Singh - the Special Public Prosecutor (SPP) who had appeared on the said date before the learned Vacation Judge - was not a validly appointed SPP under Sec. 8 of MCOCA who could have submitted his report for seeking such extension of period of investigation and petitioner's custody. It is thus contended that the petitioner was entitled to default bail, which came to be arbitrarily denied by the learned Special Judge vide order dtd. 8/7/2025.