First day of remand must be included when computing 90/60-day period for default bail under Section 167(2)(a) Cr.P.C

The Bombay HC held that in computing the 90/60-day period under Section 167(2)(a) Cr.P.C for default bail, the first day of remand must be included, not excluded. The court ruled that detention period runs from the date of first remand order, and the Limitation Act provisions regarding exclusion of first day do not apply to default bail computations. The HC set aside the Sessions Judge's order that excluded the first day, finding that since the chargesheet was filed after 60 days (including the remand date), the applicants were entitled to default bail under Section 167(2)(a)(ii) Cr.P.C.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the day of remand is to be included or excluded in computing the period of 90 days or 60 days as contemplated in Section 167(2)(a) of Cr.P.C.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Computation of Remand Period:
The primary issue in this case was whether the day of remand should be included or excluded in computing the period of 90 days or 60 days as per Section 167(2)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C). The applicants were arrested on 14th May 2020 and remanded on the same day. The Enforcement Directorate filed a complaint on 13th July 2020, and the applicants sought default bail on 13th July 2020, claiming the 60-day period expired on 12th July 2020.

2. Legal Framework and Arguments:
The applicants' counsel argued that the period should be calculated from the first day of remand, referencing the judgment in Deepak Satyavan Kudalkar Vs. State of Maharashtra, which held that the period under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. starts from the first day of remand and this day cannot be excluded. The opposing counsel cited the judgments in State of Madhya Pradesh Vs. Rustom and Ors and Ravi Prakash Vs. State of Bihar, asserting that the first day of remand should be excluded based on Section 9 of the General Clauses Act.

3. Judicial Precedents:
The court reviewed several precedents, including Chaganti Satyanarayan Vs State of Andhra Pradesh, which clarified that the period of 90 days or 60 days begins from the date of the remand order. The judgment in CBI Vs. Anupam Kulkarni also supported this view. However, the judgments in Rustam and Ravi Prakash excluded the first day of remand by applying Section 9 of the General Clauses Act.

4. Analysis of General Clauses Act:
The court analyzed Section 9 of the General Clauses Act, which generally excludes the first day in a series of days. However, it noted that Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. does not fit the typical 'from' and 'to' period required for the application of Section 9, as there is no prescribed limitation period for completing an investigation.

5. Conclusion and Order:
The court concluded that the first day of remand should not be excluded in computing the 60-day period under Section 167(2)(a) of Cr.P.C. Consequently, the applicants were entitled to default bail as the complaint was filed after the 60-day period, including the day of remand. The court ordered the release of the applicants on bail, subject to certain conditions, and rejected the request for a stay of the order.

Order:
(i) The applicants were directed to be released on bail upon executing a P.R. bond of Rs. One lakh each, with sureties.
(ii) They were required to attend the Enforcement Directorate's office every Monday.
(iii) They had to furnish their residence details and contact numbers.
(iv) They were prohibited from leaving India without prior permission.
(v) They were instructed not to tamper with evidence or dissuade witnesses.

The court emphasized that the right to default bail is indefeasible once it accrues, and no court has the power to extend the period beyond 60 days.

---