TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (2) TMI 1271
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion 34 of the Indian Penal Code. 3. The offence relates to crypto currency. The amount involved according to the Investigating Officer, who is personally present in the Court, is approximately Rs. 4 Crore. 4. Undoubtedly, it is an economic offence. We do not undermine the seriousness of the alleged crime. Unfortunately, almost 2000 investors have lost their money in the scheme floated by the appellant - herein along with other co-accused. Charge-sheet has been filed against 5 individuals including the appellant - herein. The trial is going on in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Raipur. Till date, one witness has been examined. We are informed that the first informant has entered the box and the recording of his oral evidence is going on. The problem is that the prosecution intends to examine 189 witnesses. Again, a big question who are these 189 witnesses and why the public prosecutor intends to examine so many witnesses. 5. Be that as it may, the appellant is in custody since December, 2023. Even if 50 witnesses are examined before the oral evidence is closed, it will take a long time. 6. We take notice of the fact that since the trial is being conducted by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 10. Later part of sub-section (6) of Section 437 of the Code empowers a Magistrate to refuse bail by assigning reasons. In our view, the legislature, has incorporated this provision with a view to recognize right of an accused for a speedy trial with a view to protect individual liberty. At the same time, the legislature has tried to strike a balance by allowing the Magistrate to refuse bail by assigning reasons in a given set of circumstances. Meaning thereby, that where in the opinion of the Magistrate, it is not proper or desirable or in the interest of justice to release such accused on bail, he may refuse bail by assigning reasons. The provisions of Section 437(6), as such, cannot be considered to be mandatory in nature and cannot be interpreted to grant an absolute and indefeasible right of bail in favour of accused. 11. The grounds relevant for the purpose of refusing bail would not be the same which could have weighed with the Magisterial Court while refusing bail under Section 437(1) & (2) of the Code. That is a stage much prior to trial. Whereas the stage contemplated under Section 437(6), is after filing of charge-sheet and framing of charge when trial commences a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the Code. 14. The right accrues to him only if he is in custody during the whole of the said period as can be seen from the language employed in sub-section (6) of Section 437 of the Code by the legislature. 15. It would also be relevant to take into consideration the punishment prescribed for the offence for which the accused is being tried in comparison to the time that the trial is likely to take, regard being had to the factors like volume of evidence, number of witnesses, workload on the Court, availability of prosecutor, number of accused being tried with accused and their availability for trial, etc. 16. Therefore, so far as question Nos. 3 and 4 are concerned, this Court is of the view that the factors, parameters, circumstances and grounds for seeking bail by the accused as well as grounds to be considered by the Magistrate for his satisfaction, would not be exactly the same, but they may in a fact situation be relevant and may overlap each other in both the situation. The factors which are quoted above by this Court are only illustrative and not exhaustive. 17. This Court is of a considered view that applications under Section 437 (6) have to be given a libera....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ned in Section 437(6) of the Code are complied with in its true, letter and spirit. To that extent, it appears that a right accrues in favour of an accused to tell the Court concerned that the trial has not been concluded within sixty days from the first date fixed for taking evidence for no fault on his part and, therefore, he should be released on bail, may be at that stage, there is some discretion vested in the Magistrate to refuse bail for the reasons which the Magistrate may deem fit to record. Such reasons cannot be routine. Such reasons have to weighty enough to outweigh the right that accrues to the accused in first part of sub-section (6) of Section 437 of the Code, which appears to be drawing force from Article 21 of the Constitution of India. 11.1 The words 'any case' appearing in sub section (6) of Section 437 of the Code point at the legislative intent to make that provision applicable to all cases which are Magisterial triable and nonbailable. Legislature has not drawn any other distinction for applicability of sub-section (6) of Section 437 of the Code. In comparison to that, the provisions contained in Section 167(2)(a)(i) and (ii) of the Code prov....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ate. The Magistrate has a discretion to direct otherwise (refuse bail) by recording in writing the reasons for such rejection. Q-2 The provisions contained in Section 437(6) of the Code are not mandatory. Q-3 The Magistrate has option/discretion to refuse bail by assigning reasons therefor. The parameters, factors, circumstances and grounds to be considered by Magistrate vis-avis such application preferred by the accused under Section 437(6) of the Code may be: 1. Whether the reasons for being unable to conclude trial within sixty days from the first date fixed of taking evidence, are attributable to the accused? 2. Whether there are any chances of the accused tampering with evidence or causing prejudice to the case of the prosecution in any other manner? 3. Whether there are any chances of abscondence of the accused on being bailed out? 4. Whether accused was not in custody during the whole of the said period? If the answer to any one of the above referred fact situations or similar fact situations is in affirmative than that would work as a fetter on the right that accrues to the accused under first part of sub-sectio....