(1.) Petitioner was arrested on the accusation of being in possession of 350 Kg. of opium shells punishable under Sec. 18 of the NDPS Act. As the narcotic substance allegedly seized from the possession of the petitioner was above commercial quantity, in view of Sec. 36-A(4) of NDPS Act the statutory period of detention under Sec. 167(2) Crimial P.C. in this case was 180 and the said statutory period expired on 22nd Jan., 2017. No application for extension of the statutory period up to one year was made in terms of proviso to Sec. 36-A(4) of the Act prior to expiry of the said period. Accordingly, petitioner prayed for statutory bail on 25th Jan., 2017. On the self-same date, report was filed by the Public Prosecutor seeking extension of time to file charge-sheet. Under such circumstances, by impugned order dated 25.1.2017 prayer for statutory bail of the petitioner was turned down and 3.2.2017 was fixed for filing police report. Charge-sheet was filed in the case on 28th Jan., 2017. In this backdrop, petitioner has challenged the order dated 25.1.2017 rejecting his prayer for statutory bail.
(2.) Mr. Sanyal, learned senior counsel submits as the right to statutory bail had been availed of by the petitioner prior to filing of the charge-sheet, such right to statutory bail could not be defeated by subsequent submissions of charge-sheet. He further submits prayer for extension of time to file charge-sheet was made after the expiry of 180 days could not have been entertained at all as the same had not been filed prior to the expiry of the said period.
(3.) On the other hand, Mr. Ayan Bose, the learned counsel for the State submits that prayer for extension of time to file charge sheet was made on 25th Jan., 2017, that is, on the self-same date when the petitioner availed of his right to statutory bail and the charge-sheet dated 27th Jan., 2017 was filed on 28th Jan., 2017 within the extended period, that is, 2.2017. Hence, the petitioner's prayer for statutory bail was rightly rejected.