Case Title: Daya Vati Vs. State of Delhi NCT & Anr
Bench: Justice Jasmeet Singh
Citation: CRI.M.C. 3636/2022
The benefit of section 167 CrPC will be available only if the accused has been in jail for 90 consecutive days: HC
Delhi HC ruled that the provisions of section 167 Cr.P.C. This will be applicable only if the accused has been in jail for 90 consecutive days.
A bench of Justice Jasmeet Singh was considering a petition seeking cancellation of bail of the accused challenging the impugned order in the FIR under Section 302/365/34 of IPC.
The petitioner in this case is the mother of the deceased Vishal alias Moni. The petitioner's son had left on his motorcycle.
Vishal informs his friend Chandru aka Sonu about his kidnapping and threat to his life. The deceased Vishal alias Moni called his mother and told her mother that she was not safe.
After this, the father of the deceased Vishal got a call and the deceased asked his father to save him.
Respondent No. 2, Nagesh was arrested and charged under sections 365 and 302 IPC. The Sessions Judge granted bail to respondent no.
The issue of consideration before the bench was:
Can Respondent No. 2 be granted bail or not?
The bench said that the sessions court has failed to give any cogent reason for granting bail, except the fact that the case is based on circumstantial evidence.
The High Court said that the nature of the complaint is very serious. Bail in such heinous crime of murder requires utmost attention and serious involvement of the court. It cannot be treated carelessly.
The bench observed that “the fact remains that respondent No. 2 would be entitled to default bail of 90 days under section 167 of CrPC. Not helping respondent no 2 as well as respondent no 2 was granted bail after spending 45 days in jail. Provisions of section 167 Cr.P.C. This will be applicable only if the accused has been in jail for 90 consecutive days.
In view of the above, the High Court allowed the petition.