BHOPAL (Madhya Pradesh): Supreme Court said that as far as ìExtension of time to complete investigationî is concerned, the Magistrate would not be competent to consider the request and the only competent authority to consider such request would be ìthe Courtî in cases of the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), 1967. Supreme Court said that a judicial magistrate is not competent to extend the time period for filing of a charge sheet in a case registered under the Unlawful Activities Prevention Act (UAPA), 1967.
After considering various provisions of the relevant statues, SC concluded that ìso far as all offences under the UAPA are concerned, the Magistrateís jurisdiction to extend time under the first proviso in Section 43-D (2)(b) is nonexistent.
In view of the law laid down by this Court, SC accepts the plea raised by the appellants and hold them entitled to the relief of default bail as prayed for. The appeal is, therefore, allowed. The appellants be produced before the concerned Trial Court within three days from today and the Trial Court, shall release them on bail subject to such conditions as the Trial.
The bench was hearing an appeal filed by four accused, who were denied bail by a court in Bhopal in March 2014 on the grounds that a magistrate extended the time for filing of charge sheet in their case from 90 days to 180 days. The Madhya Pradesh high court upheld this order in September 2017.
Filing of the charge sheet was directly connected to grant of bail in the case. The accused wanted default bail on the grounds that the police failed to conclude its probe and submit a charge sheet within the stipulated period of 90 days, SC observed.
