KULWINDER KAUR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD counsel for both the sides. The allegation against the petitioner-Kulwinder Kaur is that she was travelling in the Maruti van driven by Balkar Singh alongwith one Gurdev Singh and in the dicky of the said car 5 bags of poppy husk (each containing 30 kilograms) were found in contravention of the N.D.P.S. Act. The petitioner approached the Special Court, Rewari for bail on the ground that the charge-sheet had not been presented within 90 days, but the learned Special Judge dismissed the said bail application. Therefore, the petitioner has approached this Court for bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C. read with section 167 Cr.P.C.

(2.) THERE is no dispute that the petitioner was arrested on 16.5.1999 and had moved the Special Court for bail on 1.9.1999 whereas the charge-sheet was filed on 8.9.1999. The learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the period of 90 days from the date of the petitioner's arrest expired on 14.8.1999 itself and, therefore, the petitioner having filed his application for bail on 1.9.1999 and the charge-sheet having been filed only on 8.9.1999, the petitioner is entitled to be released on bail in view of the provisions contained in Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. In support of this contention, the learned counsel for the petitioner relied upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Union of India v. Thamisharasi and others, 1995(2) Recent Criminal Reports 531. The learned counsel for the petitioner also relied upon another decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Hitendra Vishnu Thakur v. State of Maharashtra, 1994(3) Recent Criminal Reports 156. The earlier case related to an offence under the N.D.P.S. Act while the latter decision related to the offence under the T.A.D.A. Act. These two decisions do support the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner.

(3.) IT is by relying upon this decision the learned Special Judge has held that though the bail application was filed before him on 1.9.1999, the charge-sheet had been filed on 8.9.1999, and since the bail application was disposed of by him on 10.9.1999, by which time the charge-sheet had been filed, the petitioner was not entitled to be released on bail.