The Supreme Court ruled on Monday that an accused person would not be eligible for bail on the grounds that of incomplete chargesheet filed against them. The court said that if the chargesheet is incomplete because it lacks a sanction from a legitimate authority, it will not make the accused entitled for default bail. A bench of CJI DY Chandrachud and Justice JB Pardiwala held that whether the sanction of a valid authority for chargesheet was required isn’t a question to be addressed while taking cognizance of an offence, rather, it is a question to be addressed during prosecution.
For context, it should be noted that Section 167 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) allows for “default bail” and allows the release of an accused person on bail if the investigation against them is not finished within the required time. To make sure that the investigation is finished within the allotted time, Section 167 was created.
According to the provision, the investigation must be finished in the first 24 hours. If the investigation cannot be finished within the first 24 hours, Section 167(1) applies. According to Section 167(1), if the investigation cannot be finished within 24 hours, it must be forwarded to the magistrate, who will decide whether or not to remand the accused into custody.
In this instance, it was argued that even though the chargesheet was submitted within the legally required time frame of 180 days, it did not do so with the approval of a legitimate authority. The chargesheet was therefore lacking crucial information and was effectively late in filing.
The court held that that a chargesheet filed without a valid sanction could not be considered an incomplete chargesheet if it was filed well within the time. This was because a valid sanction was a part of prosecution which started after cognisance of offence was taken.
