Pradeep Gogoi @ Prodip Gogoi vs State Of Assam

The Court proceedings have been conducted through remote video conferencing mode due to the prevailing situation in the State due to Covid-19

pandemic.

Heard Mr. A. Chaudhury, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner and Ms. A. Begum, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent

State of Assam.

By this application under Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), the accused-petitioner viz. Pradeep Gogoi @ Prodip Gogoi has

prayed for his release on bail as he is in custody in connection with Crime Branch Police Station Case No. 06/2021, registered under Sections

120(B)/121/121(A)/122, Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 18 of the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967 (‘the UA(P) Act’, for

short).

Mr. Chaudhury has submitted that after arrest, the accused-petitioner has been remanded to custody on 09.03.2021 and since then he is in custody.

It is further submitted by him that since 09.03.2021, a period of 90 days has elapsed. According to him, ordinarily a charge sheet under Section 173,

CrPC for the offences the accused-petitioner is suspected to be involved, is required to be submitted within a period of 90 days after completing the

investigation. However, in view of sub-section (2) of Section 43D of the UA(P) Act, the period of investigation could be extended to a period of 180

days provided a report seeking for such extension is made by the Public Prosecutor on behalf of the investigating agency and the Court after

considering the same, extends the said period up to 180 days. In the event no such application is filed, he submits that the right to default bail under

Section 167(2), CrPC accrues to the accused-petitioner immediately on expiry of 90 days and if he makes an application to that effect showing his

readiness to furnish bail, he is entitled to be released on bail under Section 167(2), CrPC. In support of his submission, he has relied in the decision of

the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India in M. Ravindran vs. Intelligence Officer, Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, reported in 2020 SCC OnLine

SC 867.

Learned Additional Public Prosecutor also by referring to the decision in M. Ravindran (supra), has submitted that an application for bail is to be

filed by the accused to enforce his right under Section 167(2), CrPC before the jurisdictional Special Court in view of the fact that the accused-

petitioner is also suspected to be involved in an offence under Section 18 of the UA(P) Act. In that view of the matter, the Public Prosecutor is to be

put on notice in respect of an application for default bail filed under the proviso to Section 167(2), CrPC to enable the Public Prosecutor to inform the

Court as to whether the prosecution has already obtained an order of extension of time up to 180 days for completing the investigation from the Court

or not. It is only in the event no such extension of time to complete the investigation up to 180 days is obtained, the right to default bail under the

proviso to Section 167(2), CrPC will accrue to the accused-petitioner. Learned Public Prosecutor has further submitted that she has no instruction as

on today as to whether any such prayer for extension of time has already been made or not and has sought for some time to obtain the instruction. It is

further submitted by her, otherwise the accused-petitioner may approach the learned jurisdictional Special Court to exercise the right under the proviso

to Section 167(2), CrPC, as already a period of 90 days has elapsed.

In the aforesaid fact situation obtaining in the case, more particularly, that a period of 90 days has already elapsed and no charge sheet under

Section 173, CrPC appears to have been submitted by the investigating authority till date and taking note of the submission of the learned Public

Prosecutor, Mr. Chaudhury, learned counsel for the accused-petitioner has submitted that the accused-petitioner will approach the learned trial Court

by filing an application in order to exercise the indefeasible right appeared to have accrued to the accused-petitioner under the proviso to Section

167(2), CrPC forthwith. In view of the above submission, this application is closed reserving the liberty to the accused-petitioner to seek the

enforcement of this right to default bail, if the same is available to him. In the event such an application is filed on behalf of the accused-petitioner, the

learned jurisdictional Special Court will consider the same in accordance with law taking into consideration the proviso to Section 167(2), CrPC.