The Supreme Court Bench comprising Justice Uday Umesh Lalit, Justice S. Ravindra Bhat and Justice Bela M. Trivedi answers the important question in the case Sadique & Ors vs. State of Madhya Pradesh that whether magistrate has jurisdiction to extend the pre-chargesheet detention period from 90 to 180 days.
Facts of the Case:
The appellants were arrested on 24.12.2013 in respect of offences punishable under Sections 307, 34, 467, 468, 481 and 120-B of IPC, Sections 25 and 27 of the Indian Arms Act, Sections 3,10,13,15,18,19,20,23,38 and 39 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (UAPA). On 20-03-2014 while dealing with an application moved on behalf of the Investigating Machinery under Section 43-D(2)(b) of the UAPA, the appropriate extension was granted by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhopal.
After completion of 90 days of their actual custody, appellants have filed bail application under section 167(2) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the ground that no charge-sheet was filed by the Investigating Agency within 90 days. Said applications were rejected by the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate. Revision applications were also rejected by the Sessions Court. On appeal, the High Court held that since the Chief Judicial Magistrate had passed an appropriate order on 20-03-2014, the period available for the Investigating Machinery to complete the investigation stood extended to 180 days and as such the applications preferred by the appellants under Section 167(2) of the Code were not maintainable and that the appellants were not entitled to the relief as prayed for. The Appellants filed an appeal against the said order of the High Court.
Supreme Court’s reasoning and Judgment:
The Supreme Court held that so far as “Extension of time to complete investigation” is concerned, the Magistrate would not be competent to consider the request and the only competent authority to consider such request would be “the Court” as specified in the proviso in Section 43-D (2)(b) of the UAPA. The Apex Court accepts the plea raised by the appellants and hold them entitled to the relief of default bail as prayed for. The Appeal is allowed.
Picture Source : twitter
