LALITA SAINI Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present petition filed under Section 482 CrPC read with Section 439(2) CrPC, the petitioner has brought a challenge to an order dated 02.08.2019 passed by the District and Sessions Judge (North-West), Rohini, Delhi, whereby respondent No. 2 was granted "default bail" in terms of Section 167(2)(a)(ii) CrPC on the ground that the prosecution has failed to file the charge-sheet within the stipulated period of 60 days from the date of the first remand. It is contended that in the present case the stipulated period for filing the charge-sheet is 90 days. A status report has been filed on behalf of the state, supporting the petition.

(2.) The proceedings arise out of FIR No.66/2016, registered under Sections 506/409/420/120-B IPC at Police Station Subhash Place, New Delhi and now being investigated by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW), New Delhi. Initially, the FIR was registered under Sections 420/406 IPC, however, during the course of investigation, Section 409 IPC was added on 15.06.2019. The respondent No.2 was arrested on 03.05.2019.

(3.) Ld counsel for the petitioner submitted that initially, the bail application filed by the Respondent no.2 seeking benefit of "default bail" under Section 167(2) CrPC, claiming that the charge sheet ought to have been filed within 60 days, was dismissed by the CMM vide order dated 08.07.2019. The said order was challenged by the respondent No.2 by way of a Revision Petition before the Sessions Court. The District and Sessions Judge, while referring to the decision rendered by Supreme Court in the case of Rakesh Kumar Paul vs. State of Assam, 2017 15 SCC 67, held that for an offence punishable under Section 409 IPC, the stipulated period for filing the charge-sheet was 60 days in terms of the provisions contained in Section 167(2)(a)(ii) of CrPC and consequently granted the "default bail" to the respondent No.2.