..1..

IN THE SPECIAL COURT FOR CBI AT GREATER BOMBAY
BAIL APPLICATION NO.875 OF 2024
IN
REMAND APPLICATION NO.1046 OF 2024
Raj Lalit Agrawal
A-203, Saidham Tower,
New Link Road,
Near Dahanukar Wadi Metro Station,
Kandivali (W), Mumbai.

.. Applicant/accused
Versus
CBI, ACB, Mumbai
.. Respondent/prosecution
Shri. Ashok Sarogi a/w Shri. Tiwari, Advocates for applicant/accused.
Shri. Sandeep Singh, SPP for respondent/Prosecution.
CORAM :
S. H. GWALANI, SPECIAL JUDGE
COURT ROOM NO.48
DATED :
05th NOVEMBER, 2024
ORAL ORDER
This is an application filed on behalf of applicant/accused Raj
Lalit Agrawal under Section 187(3) of the B.N.S.S. and identical
u/s.167 (2) of Cr.P.C. for releasing him on bail commonly known as
Сdefault bailТ for the offences punishable under Section 61(2) (a) r/w
Section 115(2), 127(2), 308 (3) of BNS, 2023 (In short, BNS Act) and
Sections 7, 7A and 12 of the PC Act,1988 (In short, СPC ActТ).
2.

Applicant
is
arraigned
as
an
accused
in
Crime
No.

RC0262024A0038/CBI/ACB/MUMBAI, for the offenses punishable
under Section 61(2) (a) r/w Section 115(2), 127(2), 308 (3) of BNS,
2023 (In short, BNS Act) and Sections 7, 7A and 12 of the PC Act,1988
..2..

(In short, СPC ActТ). Applicant/accused came to be arrested on
06.09.2024. He was remanded to Police Custody and thereafter,
remanded in Judicial Custody. Prior to filing of present application,
regular Bail application No.717 of 2024 filed by the accused, came to be
rejected by this court vide order dated 19/09/2024.
3.

Today, by filing present application, Shri. Ashok Sarogi, learned
advocate for applicant/accused submitted that Investigating Officer
ought to have filed charge-sheet within period of 60 days from the date
of arrest of the accused dated 06.09.2024, where in the present case
alleged offense is punishable with an imprisonment of up to seven years
would be violative of article 21 of Indian constitution. However, no
charge-sheet has been filed by the investigating agency till filing of
present application. Applicant is ready to abide all the terms and
conditions as this Court deem fit and proper. It appears that after filing
of the present bail application at around 11:05 a.m., as per report of the
Assistant Registrar, Sessions at around 12:30 p.m. vide CF No.19267
CBI has presented the charge-sheet.
4.

Learned advocate for applicant further submitted that as CBI has
not filed charge-sheet within period of 60 days from the date of arrest
of the accused, therefore, present application has to be decided on the
same day itself. In support of the submission, he seeks to rely upon the
authority in the case of Enforcement Directorate, Government of India
Vs. Kapil Wadhwan & Anr., wherein, the HonТble Supreme Court has
held that, УAccused has an indefeasible right to be released on bail
under Section 167(2) once the statutory period had expired without
charge-sheet having been filed, and court must dispose of bail
application of accused under Section 167(2) on the same day itselfФ.

..3..

Thus, relying upon the aforesaid authority Ld. Advocate for
applicant/accused prayed for releasing the applicant/accused on default
bail.
5.

Learned SPP Shri Sandeep Singh, for CBI submitted that more
than 60 days has been completed after applicant produced before this
Court and no charge-sheet has been filed by the CBI in the case.
However, after filing of the bail application by the accused at around
11.05 a.m., CBI through Investigating officer filed the charge-sheet in
Sessions department at 12.30 p.m. vide CF No.19267. There are serious
charges against the accused. If he is released on bail it will adversely
affect the investigation of present case which is still pending.
Accordingly, prayed for rejection of the application. However, during
course of argument he has not disputed legal principle laid down by
HonТble Apex court.
6.

Heard Ld. Counsel for the applicant and Ld. SPP for the CBI.

Admittedly, the present bail application is presented by the applicant at
around 11.05 a.m. thereafter, in view of the report (Exh.02) of the
Registrar (Sessions), CBI through Investigating officer filed the chargesheet in Sessions department at 12.30 p.m. vide CF No.19267. Perused
case laws cited by the applicant.
7.

I would like to state that, According to Section 187(3) of the
B.N.S.S., a Magistrate can not detained an accused in custody under
this provision for a total period exceeding:i) Ninety days for offenses punishable by death, life imprisonment or
imprisonment for ten year or more.

..4..

ii) Sixty days for all other offenses. After the expiration of the specified
period (90 days or 60 days) the accused must be release on bail if they
are willing and able to provide it.
8.

I would like to state that, default bail is a specific type of bail that
operates as a safeguard against prolonged detention without trial. It is
also referred to as Сstatutory bailТ or Сcompulsory bailТ, highlighting its
legal basis and mandatory nature. This type of bail ticks in when
investigating agencies fail to complete their investigation and file a
charge sheet within a stipulated timeframe.
9.

The law prescribes specific time limit for filing charge-sheet
depending on the severity of the offense. For crimes punishable up to 7
years the charge sheet must be filed within sixty days. In the present
case admittedly alleged offense is punishable with an imprisonment of
up to seven years. Therefore, as per section 187 (3) of B.N.S. Act, an
indefeasible right and any custody beyond a period of sixty days would
be violative of Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. Should the
investigation remain incomplete and the charge-sheet not filed within
the designated period, the accused individual becomes eligible for
default bail. This is a legal right, and accused must apply for at once the
prescribed time frame expires. The court is legally obligated to grant
bail, provided the accused is willing to furnish the required bail bonds.
Default bail essentially ensures that individual are not detained
indefinitely without a formal trial. If acts as a mechanism to protect
individual liberty and prevent arbitrary detention, ensuring that the
legal process upholds in a timely and fair manner.

..5..

10.

Admittedly, present accused has been arrested on 06.09.2024 and
thereafter he was remanded to police custody and thereafter remanded
to judicial custody. As punishment prescribed for the above mentioned
offenses against the accused up to seven years. Therefore, as per section
183 (2), period of 60 days custody is applicable. In the present case,
charge-sheet should be filed within 60 days from the date of arrest.
Inspite of the same, CBI failed to file charge-sheet in time limit.
Admittedly, in the present case accused has been arrested on
06.09.2024 and produced before this court on the same date. As per
calculation 25 days of the September, 31 days of the October and 05
days of November till today comes to 61 days. Learned SPP for CBI
fairly admitted that more than 60 days has been completed but no
charge-sheet has been filed by Investigating Agency. Therefore, taking
into consideration the circumstances available on record and report
submitted by the Registrar (Sessions) vide Exh.03 and
above legal
principles laid down by the HonТble Apex case is squarely application to
the facts of present case and as stated by both sides, statutory period of
60 days has expired without charge-sheet having been filed, this Court
would have no option but to release the applicant/accused on bail
187(3) of the B.N.S.S. (default bail) on certain terms and conditions.
Therefore, I proceed to pass following order:
ORDER
1.

Bail Application No.875 of 2024 (Default Bail) is allowed.

2.

Applicant/accused Raj Lalit Agrawal be released on bail on his
executing P.R. Bond of Rs.50,000/- (Rupees Fifty Thousand only) with
one or two solvent sureties in like amount, in connection with Crime
No. RC0262024A0038, registered with CBI, ACB, Mumbai.

..6..

3.

Applicant/accused shall not directly or indirectly make any
inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts
of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the
Court or tamper with evidence.
4.

He shall furnish his permanent residential address and so also
local address, if any, along with mobile number to the Court and
Investigating officer. In case of change of address and mobile number,
he shall intimate the same in advance to the Court and Investigating
officer.
5.

He shall not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

6.

Accordingly, bail application stands disposed of.

Date : 05.11.2024
(S. H. Gwalani)
Special Judge, CBI
Gr. Bombay
..7..

УCERTIFIED TO BE TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE ORIGINAL
SIGNED JUDGMENT/ORDER.Ф
05.11.2024, 05.46 p.m.
UPLOAD DATE AND TIME
Mr. Santosh D. Redekar
Clerk-Typist
Name of the Judge (With Court H.H.J. Shri. S. H. Gwalani
Room No.)
C.R.No.48
Date of Pronouncement of
JUDGMENT/ORDER
05.11.2024
JUDGMENT/ORDER signed by P.O. 05.11.2024
on
JUDGMENT/ORDER uploaded on
05.11.2024