SK. MIRAJ Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner prays for default bail.

(2.) Learned Advocate appearing for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is entitled for default bail. He relies upon (2021) 2 Supreme Court Cases 485 (M. Ravindran Vs. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence) in support of his contention. He submits that the petitioner was arrested on February 3, 2021. The petitioner was produced before the learned Magistrate on February 4, 2021. 180 from the date of the arrest expired on July 30, 2021. An application for extension of time to file the charge-sheet was submitted which was allowed. The extended time expired on September 30, 2021. No chargesheet was submitted within extended time. Consequently, on October 1, 2021, the right of obtaining default bail approved in favour of the petitioner. The petitioner exercised such right on October 1, 2021 itself. He refers to the order dated October 1, 2021 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court. He submits that the bail petition was initially taken up for hearing by the learned Judge, Special Court. The order records that the learned Counsel for the prosecution sought leave of the Court for one and half hours to ascertain whether the charge-sheet was filed or not. It also records that after an hour the conclusion of hearing of the bail petition, charge-sheet was submitted against the petitioner. He draws the attention of the Court to Paragraph 24 of M. Ravindran (Supra).

(3.) Learned Advocate appearing for the State submits that the chargesheet was submitted on October 1, 2021 itself. The charge-sheet was before the Court prior to the pronouncement of the order granting bail. Therefore, it cannot be said that the right of default bail in favour of the petitioner. In any event, even if such right of default bail accrued in favour of the petitioner, the same stood extinguished immediately on filing the charge-sheet on October 1, 2021 itself.