SUCHIT ARUNKUMAR RAHULKAR. Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Hearing was conducted through Video Conferencing and the learned Counsel agreed that the audio and visual quality was proper.

(2.) The applicant, accused of Crime No. 49./2020, registered at Gondia City Police Station has invoked inherent jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to agitate his right to be released on bail in default. The applicant/accused would contend that the investigating agency has not followed the mandatory procedure as prescribed under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure by filing charge sheet within the stipulated period of 90 days, and therefore, he is entitled to bail in default. The applicant has accordingly moved before the Special Court, however, vide impugned order dated 04.05.2020, his application (Exh.25), came to be rejected.

(3.) The learned Counsel for the applicant would submit that on expiry of period of 90 days, an indefeasible right accrued in his favour for being released on bail on account of default by the investigating agency in filing charge sheet and therefore, he has right to be released on bail. It is submitted that no sooner the charge sheet was not forthcoming during statutory period of 90 days, the applicant has applied for grant of bail and was prepared to furnish bail, however, the Special Court has rejected the application by erroneously holding that due to pandemic situation of Covid-19, the period has been automatically extended. According to him, the Special Court erred in interpreting the orders passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Suo Motu Writ Petition No.3/2020 as well as circular of this Court dated 06.03.2020.