The State through CBI v. T. Gangi Reddy @ Yerra Gangi Reddy (the Right to Default Bail)
Introduction
The case of The State through CBI v. T. Gangi Reddy @ Yerra Gangi is a landmark judgment on default bail in India (latest judgment of the Supreme Court on default bail) shaping the criminal jurisprudence and relating to the right of default bail of the accused. The right to bail has already been declared as an important facet of personal liberty as guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in this case the right to default bail was finally settled by the Supreme Court.
The present case law note aims to answer various questions as raised by the Supreme Court in the case of The State through CBI v. T. Gangi Reddy @ Yerra Gangi like, what is default bail, the provisions relating to default bail, in what circumstances the right to default bail arises and can the person who has been released on default bail may be incarcerated again and all the related questions.
What is default bail? What is the meaning of default bail?
Default bail meaning may be expressed as-
Firstly, to be released on bail is some form of declaration which is made by the accused person, that if released during trial he would make himself available for the purpose of investigation and trial. The provisions of bail are governed by the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 which now have been replaced by the Bhartiya Nyayaik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS).
According to these provisions and the Supreme Court guidelines in various cases, generally it is incumbent upon the courts to release the accused on bail if the accused is not involved in some serious form of offences like rape and murder or would not tamper with the evidence of the case.
It must be mentioned that in bailable offence accused has a right to be released on bail under Section 436 Crpc and in non-bailable offence it is the discretion of the Court to release or not to release the accused person. When an accused is released in non-bailable offence by the Court after considering various factors, he is said to be released on merits.
The right to default bail arises when investigation is not conducted in the required time frame and is dealt under Section 167(2) of the Crpc. It is to be noted that the Crpc provides a time frame work of 90 days (if the offence is punishable with death, life imprisonment or an imprisonment for more than 10 years) and 60 days in any other case to complete the investigation. If such investigation is not completed in due time, then the accused must be released on bail and this compulsory release of accused in failure of investigation agency to complete the investigation in due time is known as default bail.
The purpose of default bail is to create a sense of urgency in the investigating authorities to carry out the process in a speedy manner and to not infringe somebody’s liberty and freedom for the indefinite period of time.
Facts of the Case
- The present case involved the murder of a former MLA, namely, Y.S. Vivekananda Reddy in 2019.
- Accordingly, the matter was recorder under Section 302 (murder) read with Section 120 B (conspiracy) of the Indian Penal Code was recorded.
- The matter was first investigated by the Special Investigation team (SIT) which was later transferred to the Central Bureau of Investigation, (CBI) Central agency.
- When the investigation with SIT was going on the statutory period of 90 days as mentioned above was completed and the accused applied for the default bail.
- The default bail was granted.
- Later on, when the matter was transferred to the CBI, it filed the charge sheet.
- Also, on the subsequent filing of charge sheet by the CBI, it applied for the cancellation of default bail application which was granted earlier.
- The High Court of Andhra Pradesh denied the application of CBI and held that ones the default bail is granted, the accused can’t be rearrested on the subsequent filing of charge sheet.
- Therefore, the CBI challenged the said decision of the Andhra High Court before the Supreme Court.
Issue before the Supreme Court
The main issue in the present case before the Supreme Court was that whether a default bail may be cancelled on the subsequent filing of the charge sheet by the prosecution?
Arguments before the Supreme Court
- The appellant (CBI) mainly argued that if the accused is released on default bail then he may be rearrested on the subsequent filing of charge sheet if some strong case is made out against the accused.
- Because, the default bail is not given on merits and if charge sheet justifies the incarceration of accused on merits, then the same must be permitted.
- Moreover, even if accused is released on merits, his release is not absolute and he may be rearrested and his application may be rejected under Section 437 (5)Crpc, if it is shown that he has violated some conditions of his release, or his release is not in public interest, or he has tampered with evidence. Therefore, no release is absolute.
- The respondent submitted that the release under Section 167(2) is absolute and the accused can’t be rearrested if he is released under this section.
- Moreover, Section 167 itself says that if accused is released under Section 167(2), he shall be deemed to be released under Section 436 and 437 also. Therefore, on account of such deeming provision accused may not be rearrested.
- Also, if rearrests are allowed then the purpose of Section 167(2) would be defeated because the sense of urgency as created because of the right to default bail would be vanished.
- The rules of interpretation also requires that if in the interpretation of criminal statutes, any ambiguity arises then it must be resolved in the favor of accused person. Hence, here also accused is entitled to the benefit.
Final Decision of the Court
The Supreme Court considered the arguments from both the sides and other previously decided cases held that-
The right to default bail undoubtedly an important right in the favor of accused. However, if ones exercised, it doesn’t mean that on the subsequent filing of charge –sheet, it can’t be cancelled. It means that if on the subsequent filing of charge-sheet, the prosecution is able to establish a strong case against the accused that he is involved in some serious offence and his detention is necessary then such default bail may be cancelled and it is to be considered afresh on merits.
Conclusion of landmark judgment on default bail
The case of The State through CBI v. T. Gangi Reddy @ Yerra Gangi Reddy (the Right to Default Bail) serves as latest judgment of Supreme Court on right to default bail.
Therefore, the Supreme Court in this case has ultimately settled the issue in affirmatively and held that on a subsequent filing of charge sheet the default bail may be cancelled provided that a strong case is established against the accused to cancel his bail. It is definitely a landmark judgment on default bail.