Keywords: Bail ,chargesheet, forensic science laboratory
Three defendants in a drug case were recently granted default bail by the Punjab and Haryana High Court on the grounds that the police had failed to submit the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report with their charge sheet [Taswwar Khan versus State of Haryana].
Regarding cases filed under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (Act), Justice Vikas Suri acknowledged that there has been some debate regarding whether a chargesheet submitted without an accompanying FSL report is incomplete.The judge was informed that the matter is currently pending before both the Supreme Court and a Full Bench of the High Court.However, after taking into account that the accused had been detained for more than nine months, Justice Suri granted default bail in the case at hand. In a case where the chargesheet lacked an FSL report, the Supreme Court notably granted default bail in Arif Khan v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi). In the current case, the High Court also granted default bail based on this ruling.
The petitioners have been detained for over nine months, so this court believes it is appropriate to grant them bail under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. in light of everything that has been mentioned above, the High Court stated. But the judge made it clear that if the prosecution wins on the bigger issue of whether a chargesheet is complete without the FSL report, either the Full Bench of the High Court or the Supreme Court may request a recall of the bail order.
The High Court was considering an NDPS case that was filed in Faridabad. On April 28, the police presented the trial court with the final report. The High Court heard a challenge after the trial court refused to give the accused statutory default bail.When the FSL report was not included with the challan, the accused asked whether he or she would be able to request statutory bail. This question was brought before the High Court.The prosecution contended that the absence of an FSL report in the chargesheet does not automatically render it incomplete.
Justice Suri pointed out that the High Court had previously decided that in the event that an FSL report is not included with the chargesheet, the accused would be eligible for default bail. A 2021 High Court decision also upheld this. Nonetheless, a larger bench of the High Court was still debating a reference from September 2020 regarding the completeness of such a chargesheet. Justice Suri was also informed that the Supreme Court was still deliberating over the case.
The accused parties should be granted default bail, the Court concluded after taking into account a number of rulings, given that they have been detained for more than nine months.The petitioners (accused) were represented by Senior Advocate Dr Anmol Rattan Sidhu, Advocate Pranshul Dhull, Advocates Kamal K. Chaudhary, and Johan Kumar. The State of Haryana was represented by Deputy Advocate General Pawan Jhanda.
References:
Anushka Shukla, Faculty of Law, University of Lucknow, Intern At Legal Vidhiya
Disclaimer: The materials provided herein are intended solely for informational purposes. Accessing or using the site or the materials does not establish an attorney-client relationship. The information presented on this site is not to be construed as legal or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon for such purposes or used as a substitute for advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Additionally, the viewpoint presented by the author is of a personal nature.
0 Comments