Magoola John vs State of Karnataka. Criminal Petition 5935/2020 decided on 26 November 2020.
Judgment Link: http://judgmenthck.kar.nic.in/judgmentsdsp/bitstream/123456789/350690/1/CRLP5935-20-26-11-2020.pdf
Relevant paragraphs: 11.Be that as it may. Even as could be seen from Section 36(A)(4) proviso indicates that if any person has been charged for the offence under the said Act for the purpose of filing of the charge sheet is 180 days time has been provided. Proviso to the said Section enables the Investigating Agency, if within 180 days if it is not possible to complete the investigation, then it can move the application before the Special Court for extension of the said period up to one year. But in order to file an application it has to fulfill two conditions. The first condition is that the prosecution has to indicate the progress of the investigation made till that date and the second condition is the specific reason for detention of the accused beyond the said period of 180 days. But on perusal of the application filed by the learned Public Prosecutor, no such reasons have been assigned except stating that, for the purpose of filing of the charge sheet, FSL report is an important document and when the charge sheet cannot filed and the FSL report has also not come, as such 180 days has to be extended.
12. Be that as it may. Even as could be seen from the records, the said application has been filed on 4.9.2020 and immediately thereafter the Court has issued the notice to the accused for his reply and the order sheet indicates that he has filed his objections to the said application on 9.9.2020 and even at that time also no order has been passed by the trial Court either extending the time or giving any reasons on the application filed under Section 167(2) of Cr.P.C. When the time of 180 days is going to be expired on 6.9.2020, before that or on the same day, the Court could have passed an order either extending of time or otherwise. When an application has been filed for the purpose of extension of time on 4.9.2020 and the accused was admittedly in judicial custody, the trial Court ought to have taken into consideration the statutory right available to the accused and it could have been expedited on or before 6.9.2020. When the Court has not exercised its power on the application filed under Section 36(A)(4) of NDPS Act for extension, then the statutory right which has been there to the accused accrues immediately after 180 days and if an application has been filed by the accused and if it is pending, then the right will be there to get him released on bail.
Compiled by S. Basavaraj, Advocate, Daksha Legal
Daksha Legal 