DIRECTORATE OF REVENUE INTELLIGENCE Vs. SANDEEP BHAVANISHANKER JOSHI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Sufficient time was granted to the petitioner for appointing an advocate to address the matter, however, the petitioner - Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, Jamnagar, is the original complainant has failed to even comply with the order dtd. 2/5/2022.

(2.) Mr. Rahul K. Dave, learned advocate for Mr. Kiritidev Dave, learned advocate for the respondent No.1 has brought to the notice of this court that the challenge is given to the order dtd. 29/12/2016 passed by learned JMFC, Rajula, only to the aspect of observations with regard to "malafide and non-filing of the chargesheet".

(3.) Mr. Dave, learned advocate submitted that the default bail was granted under Sec. 167(2)(a)(ii) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the learned Magistrate has considered non-filing of the chargesheet within the stipulated time as negligence of the investigating officer, and therefore, directed for necessary proceedings to the concerned department.