IN THE COURT OF SESSION FOR GREATER BOMBAY, BOMBAY.
BAIL APPLICATION NO.868 OF 2018
CNR NO.: MHCC020153292018
(In crime no.32/2018 of ACB, Mumbai, for offences punishable under
sections 7, 7A and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 in ACB
RA No.947/2018.)
Sachin Shankar Salve
]
Aged: 32 years, Indian Inhabitant,
]
Occ.: Service, R/o.: Room No.505,
]
Sahakar Bhavan, Near Damodar Hall, ]
Dr. Babasaheb Ambedkar Marg,
]
Parel, Mumbai – 400 012.
]
APPLICANT
(ACCUSED NO.2)
V/s.
The State of Maharashtra through the ]
SHO, ACB, Mumbai.
]
RESPONDENT
(PROSECUTION)
APPEARANCE:
Mr. Sourabh More h/f Mr. Shrinivas Balla, Advocates for the
Applicant/Accused No.2.
Mr. Ramesh Siroya, APP for the Complainant/State.
APPLICATION FOR DEFAULT BAIL UNDER SECTION 167(2) OF THE
CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
CORAM : SHRI S.V. YARLAGADDA
SPECIAL JUDGE UNDER THE
PREVENTION OF CORRUPTION ACT
(Court Room No.54)
DATE :
1st December, 2018.
ORDER
(Dictated and pronounced in open Court)
The applicant is accused no.2 in the case. The applicant
2
was arrested and produced before the Court first on 02.10.2018 for
offences under section 7, 7A and 12 of the Prevention of Corruption Act,
1988 as amended in 2018. He is in judicial custody since then. Hence,
this application is filed for bail under section 167(2) of the Code of
Criminal Procedure.
2.
The prosecution filed its say and submitted that there is
ample evidence against the applicant for conviction. Due to technical
and procedural formalities, the chargesheet could not be filed today.
3.
I heard the learned advocate for the applicant, the
investigating officer and the learned additional public prosecutor.
4.
The applicant’s learned advocate argued that as the
applicant was produced on 02.10.2018, today is 61 st day. Even if the
date of his production is excluded, it would be 60th day. The Court
hours are almost about to be over. Tomorrow is holiday. Since the
chargesheet is not filed till this time, he urged for granting the default
bail. The applicant’s learned advocate submitted that the day of his
production has to be necessarily included as one day and thus, today is
61st day.
5.
The investigating officer submitted that actually he
completed the investigation, prepared the chargesheet and submitted it
for its scrutiny and obtaining sanction to prosecute the applicant. It is
pending in that process. He submitted a copy of the chargesheet in the
remand application.
3
6.
The learned additional public prosecutor submitted that
because of the above mentioned reasons, the chargesheet could not be
filed today. He reiterated the above mentioned grounds.
7.
The applicant was produced first on 02.10.2018.
The
maximum period up to which he can be kept in custody pending the
investigation, is 60 days. Because, none of the offences are punishable
with death or imprisonment for life. Instead of 60 days, had it been one
day, the said period would have expired on 03.12.2018. The period of
one day cannot end on the same day. Similarly a plain calculation of 60
days period from 02.10.2018 would show that today is 60 th day and not
61st day. On this point, my view is fortified by the authority of Ravi
Prakash Singh V/s. State of Bihar, AIR 2015 SC 1294. Therefore, the
submission of the learned advocate for the applicant that this is 61 st day,
cannot be accepted.
8.
Regarding his other submissions that today the time for
producing the chargesheet is almost over and tomorrow being holiday,
the applicant is entitled for default bail right now, the office hours are
not to be counted. Today being the 60 th day and the accused being
already remanded to judicial custody till 03.12.2018, default bail cannot
be granted on 60th day.
Therefore, the application is liable to be
rejected with liberty to file fresh application on 61 st day onwards.
Hence, the following order is passed.
FINAL ORDER
The application for default bail is rejected with liberty to file
application as mentioned above.
Separate order will be passed on 03.12.2018 about the failure of
4
the Investigating Officer to file the chargesheet. He may file his
explanation in writing if he desires on that date.
The bail application is disposed off accordingly.
Date: 01/12/2018.
(S.V. YARLAGADDA)
Special Judge
Under the Prevention of Corruption Act,
Greater Bombay.
Order Dictated on : 01/12/2018
Transcribed on
: 03/12/2018
Signed on
: 03/12/2018
“CERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED ORDER.”
03/12/2018 at 5.40 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
BHARAT KASHINATH GAIKWAD
NAME OF STENOGRAPHER
Name of the Judge
HHJ SHRI S.V. YARLAGADDA
(Court Room No.54)
Date of pronouncement of Order
01/12/2018
Order signed by P.O. on
03/12/2018
Order uploaded on
03/12/2018