Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether the applicant was entitled to default bail on the ground that the charge-sheet was incomplete because certain FSL reports, medical opinions and sanction under the Arms Act were awaited.
Analysis: The statutory right under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 arises only when the police report is not filed within the prescribed period or when no complete final report is filed within that period. A report filed on time is not rendered incomplete merely because further investigation continues under Section 173(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 or because expert opinions, scientific reports or other corroborative material are awaited. Sanction under Section 39 of the Arms Act, 1959 is not part of the investigation contemplated by Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and its pendency does not by itself revive a claim to default bail.
Conclusion: The charge-sheet was not incomplete and the applicant was not entitled to default bail.
Final Conclusion: The bail application based on statutory default bail failed because the investigation was treated as complete for the purpose of Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, notwithstanding pending supplementary material.
Ratio Decidendi: Once a police report is filed within the statutory period with sufficient material to prosecute the accused, pendency of further investigation, expert reports, or sanction does not create an indefeasible right to default bail.