Madras High Court
Dineshkumar vs State By on 24 January, 2023
Crl.R.C.No.116 of 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MADRAS
DATED: 24.01.2023
CORAM
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE V.SIVAGNANAM
Crl.R.C.No.116 of 2023
Dineshkumar ... Petitioner
Vs.
State by
The Inspector of Police,
P-2, Otteri Police Station,
Chennai.
Crime No.490 of 2022 ... Respondent
PRAYER : Criminal Revision Case has been filed under sections 397 read
with 401 of Criminal Procedure Code to set aside the order passed in
Crl.M.P.No.5897/2022 dated 29.11.2022 by the learned Principal Special
Judge, Special Court under EC NDPS Act Cases at Chennai by allowing
this Criminal Revision Case.
For Petitioner : Mr.T.S.Srinivasan
For Respondent : Mr.V.Meganathan
Government Advocate (Crl.Side)
1 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.116 of 2023
ORDER
This Criminal Revision Case is filed challenging the impugned order
passed by the learned Principal Special Judge, Special Court under EC
NDPS Act Cases, Chennai, in Crl.M.P.No.5897/2022 dated 29.11.2022.
2. The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner
is A2 in the case registered by the respondent police in Crime No.490 of
2022 for the offences under Section 8(c) r/w.20(b)(ii)(c) of NDPS Act and
he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody from 24.05.2022. The
respondent police had not filed Final Report within the statutory period of
180 days as mandated under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. Hence, the petitioner
filed statutory bail petition before the Trial Court in Crl.M.P.No5897/2022,
which was dismissed on the ground that the respondent police filed a
petition on 18.11.2022 under Section 36A(4) of NDPS Act, for extension of
time for filing Final Report. It was unsustainable. Hence, seeking to set
aside the impugned order passed by the Trial Court and to grant of statutory
bail.
2 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.116 of 2023
3. The learned Government Advocate (Crl.Side) for the respondents
submitted that the respondent police filed a petition under Section 36A (4)
of NDPS Act, on 18.11.2022. As on date, no order has been passed in the
petition for extension of time for filing the Final Report, but the petition
filed to enlarge the petitioner on bail was dismissed.
4. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel
and perused the materials on record.
5. On a perusal of the records, the fact reveals that the petitioner is A2
in Crime No.490 of 2022. The respondent police registered a case against
the petitioner for the offences under Section 8(c) r/w.20(b)(ii)(c) of NDPS
Act and he was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 24.05.2022.
The respondent police seized the contraband of 44 kgs of Ganja, which is of
commercial quantity. After investigation, the respondent police has not filed
Final Report within the statutory period of 180 days. Hence the petitioner
filed a petition under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C., in Crl.M.P.No.5897 of 2022
3 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.116 of 2023
for statutory bail on 22.11.2022. Further, the fact reveals that the respondent
police filed a petition under Section 36A(4) of NDPS Act, only on 179th day
i.e., on 18.11.2022 for extension of time for filing Final Report. The Trial
Court refused to grant bail to the petitioner, since the extension petition
filed by the respondent police has been pending. Therefore, on the date of
deciding the bail petition filed by the petitioner, the time for filing Final
Report was not extended. Therefore, in view of the dictum laid down by the
Constitution Bench of our Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Sanjay
Dutt Vs. State Through B.I.Bombay (II) (1994(5) SCC page 410) which
has been reaffirmed by subsequent judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court
in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Rustam, reported in 1995 SCC Crl.830, if
an accused filed a petition for statutory bail, on the expiry of the period
contemplated under the proviso to sub Section (2) of Section 167 of Cr.P.C.,
and offering him to release on bail, no charge sheet had been filed by the
respondent police, then the accused has to be released on bail and the right
conferred upon him under the aforesaid provision of Cr.P.C., must be
enforced. Merely dismissing such petition on the ground of receiving
4 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.116 of 2023
petition for extension of time and kept the same pending without passing
any order on that petition, would frustrate the right of the accused.
Therefore, in view of the above discussions, the order of the Trial Court is
unsustainable and the same is liable to be set aside.
6. Accordingly, this Criminal Revision Case is allowed and the
impugned order is set aside and the petitioner/accused is enlarged on
statutory bail on the following conditions:
(i) The petitioner shall execute a bond for a
sum of Rs.25,000/- (Rupees Twenty Five
Thousand only) along with two sureties, each for
a likesum to the satisfaction of the learned
Principal Special Judge, Special Court under EC
NDPS Act Cases, Chennai.
(ii) The petitioner and the sureties shall
affix their photographs and Left Thumb
Impression in the surety bond and the Trial Court
may obtain a copy of their Aadhaar card or Bank
pass book to ensure their identity: and
5 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.116 of 2023
(iii) The petitioner shall appear before the
Trial Court as and when required.
24.01.2023
rpl
To
1.The Principal Special Judge, Special Court under EC & NDPS Act Cases,
Chennai
2.The Inspector of Police,
P-2, Otteri Police Station,
Chennai.
3.The Public Prosecutor,
High Court of Madras,
Chennai-104.
6 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
Crl.R.C.No.116 of 2023
V.SIVAGNANAM, J.,
rpl
Crl.R.C.No.116 of 2023
24.01.2023
7 of 7
https://www.mhc.tn.gov.in/judis
