Section 436A bail undertrial custody is not automatic where serious economic offences and wider prosecution justify continued detention.

Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure is intended to prevent an undertrial from remaining in custody beyond half of the maximum sentence prescribed for the offence, but its provisos preserve judicial discretion to refuse release even where that threshold is crossed. On the facts noted, the court treated the petitioner's claimed entitlement to bail as non-absolute because of the seriousness of the allegations, involvement in large-scale economic offences, and the broader prosecution arising from the same subject matter. The bail application was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to release on bail under Section 436A of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the ground of prolonged custody.

Analysis: Section 436A is intended to prevent detention of an undertrial beyond half of the maximum period of imprisonment prescribed for the offence, but the provision must be read with its provisos. The first proviso preserves judicial discretion to decline release even where the statutory threshold is crossed. In view of the seriousness of the allegations, the involvement of the petitioner in large-scale economic offences, and the wider prosecution arising out of the same subject matter, the claimed entitlement was not treated as absolute.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to bail under Section 436A and the application was rejected.

---