KAMAL PRASAD MAHTO Vs. STATE OF JHARKHAND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioners in this application under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, have challenged the order dated 5.6.2010 passed by the ACJM, Rajmahal in G.R. No. 136 of 2010 corresponding to Barharwa P.S. Case No. 27 of 2010 whereby, the trial court had refused to accept the bail bonds furnished by the petitioners, though order for granting bail was passed earlier.

(2.) Heard counsel for the petitioners and the counsel for the State.

(3.) As it appears from the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioners, the present case against the petitioners was instituted and registered at the police station on 22.3.2010 for the offences under section 392 IPC. Later, on 27.3.2010, offences under section 411 IPC was added. Considering the maximum punishment stipulated for the offences, the period of detention of the accused persons during the course of investigation could extend up to 60 days from the date of their initial remand to judicial custody under the provisions of section 167(2) of the Cr. PC. It appears that no charge sheet was submitted by the investigating officer even till the 70th day of judicial custody of the petitioners from the date of their initial remand. On 4.6.2010 which was the 70th day, the petitioners had filed their prayer for bail offering to submit their respective bail bonds if the order of release on bail is passed. The learned court below obtained a report from the concerned office as to whether charge sheet has been submitted or not. The report was received and as per the endorsement on the bail application of the petitioners filed on the same day, confirmed that no charge sheet was submitted. Accepting the report, the learned court below passed the order granting bail to the petitioners and directed them to furnish their respective bail bonds.