RAJUBHAI JACOB MATHEW PINTO Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for the parties. Perused the record.

(2.) THE Applicants were arrested on 22nd July, 2004. As no charge-sheet was filed within the stipulated period of 90 days, application under section 167 (2) of the Criminal procedure Code was filed on behalf of the applicants for being released on bail on 21st october, 2004 at 11 a. m. Indeed, the prosecution filed the charge-sheet on the same day at about 3 p. m. These are the admitted facts. Thus time taken for filing of the charge-sheet from the date of arrest, it cannot be disputed that the charge-sheet has been filed after 90 days; but before the expiry of the filing of the charge-sheet the applicants admittedly preferred Application for being released on bail under section 167 (2) of the code on 21st October, 2004. The fact that the charge-sheet has been filed on the same day, which is posterior in point of time will make no difference to the legal position. Applicants have rightly placed reliance on the decision of the apex Court -2001 Supreme Court Cases (Cri)760 : [2001 ALL MR (Cri) 713 (S. C.)] in the case of Uday Mohanlal Acharya Vs. State of maharashtra as well as on the decision of our high Court, which directly deals with this aspect, reported in 1999 (2) Mh. L. J. 554 in the case of ramesh Madhukar Vs. State of Maharashtra. Viewed in this perspective, the Application for bail as filed on behalf of the Applicants under section 167 (2) of the Code ought to have succeeded. This was the only question which was required to be considered by the court below. However, no clear adjudication on this issue has been undertaken by the lower court. Accordingly, this Application succeeds on the following terms :-