AMIT MADHUKAR BHOGALE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These are the applications claiming entitlement to default bail under Sec. 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereafter 'Cr.P.C.' for short).

(2.) Before adverting to the facts of the present case, I may at the very outset seek guidance from the decision in Aslam Babalal Desai vs. State of Maharashtra, (1992) 4 SCC 272 wherein the object and scope of Sec. 167 of the Cr.P.C. has been authoritatively stated. Paragraph 36 thereunder reads thus:-

(3.) The Supreme Court has observed that the intention of the Legislature seems to be to grant no discretion to the Court and to make it obligatory for it to release the accused on bail if the investigation cannot be completed within the period stipulated by Sec. 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. If the investigation is not completed within the aforesaid period, then even in serious and ghastly types of crimes the accused will be entitled to be released on bail. These observations of the Supreme Court have to be kept in mind. Their Lordships observed that such a law may be 'paradise for the criminals', but surely it would not be so, as sometimes it is supposed to be, because of the Courts, it would be so under the command of the Legislature.