HARENDRA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these three cases are being decided by this common order as similar questions are involved.

(2.) The brief facts of the case are that all the three applicants were arrested by the police authorities on 5.2.2020 in connection with the First Information Report dated 4.2.2020, which was registered as Case Crime No. 15 of 2020, under Sections 302, 201 I.P.C., P.S. Harpur Budhat, District Gorakhpur. On the said day of arrest, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Gorakhpur vide his order dated 5.2.2020 remanded all the three applicants to the police custody and since then they continued to be in police custody.

(3.) Counsel for the applicants argues that 90 days were completed on 5.5.2020, however, no charge-sheet was filed, as such the applicants filed their bail applications seeking release on default under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. All the said bail applications were preferred on 8.5.2020. In the case of Ramu, the said bail application was rejected by order dated 12.5.2020 mainly on the ground that as per the case diary, the charge-sheet has been dispatched on 8.5.2020, and thus the applicants right of bail under Section 167(2) stood lost. In respect of applicants Harendra and Rajesh, their bail applications were rejected vide order dated 13.5.2020 on the same ground that as per the case diary, the charge-sheet had been dispatched on 8.5.2020, however the said orders do not record whether the charge-sheet had actually been filed before the Court concerned on 8.5.2020.