SHINO PAUL Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The questions of law involved in this Bail Application are (1) whether the accused would be entitled to 'default bail' under the proviso (a) to Sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in a case where the charge sheet filed within time was returned by the learned Magistrate to the investigating officer with certain directions regarding investigation, and when the charge sheet was not re-Submitted within ninety days from the date of arrest of the accused. (2) When the charge sheet was filed within time and cognizance was not taken, whether the Magistrate has jurisdiction to remand an accused to judicial custody. If so, would Section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure apply to the situation

(2.) Bail Application No. 6816 of 2009 is filed by Sunil alias Suni (accused No. 7), Aneesh Kumar (accused No. 9), Binoy Markose alias Binoy (accused No. 10) and Jain Jose alias Jain (accused No. 11) in Crime No. 197 of 2009 of Nedumudy Police Station. Bail Application No. 6890 of 2009 is filed by Shino Paul (Accused No. 4) and Akash Sasidharan alias Rajesh (accused No. 5) in the aforesaid Crime. The Bail Applications are filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Apart from contending that the petitioners are entitled to get 'default bail', the petitioners have also raised a contention that even if they are not entitled to relief on that count, they are otherwise entitled to be released on bail.

(3.) The offences alleged against the accused persons, 25 in number, are under Sections 143, 147, 148, 324, 302, 120-B, 201 and 212 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 of the Explosive Substances Act.