'Misconceived': Allahabad HC Dismisses PIL For 'Default Bail' To Rape Accused If Chargesheet Not Filed Within 2 Months Of FIR

The Bench of Justice Manoj Misra and Justice Vikas Budhwar dismissed the plea for being ‘misconceived’ as it noted that such a prayer need not be addressed in a public interest litigation.

Essentially, the PIL plea was moved by Vaibhav Kumar Pandey and another seeking a direction to declare that an accused under sections 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB and 376E of IPC may seek 'Default Bail', upon failure of investigating authorities to file chargesheet within two months of lodging of First Information Report.

However, the Court dismissed the plea by making the following observations:

“Such a prayer need not be addressed in a public interest litigation as the person who seeks a default bail may do so by applying to the court concerned and if such benefit is not accorded he may take recourse to appropriate remedy before a higher court.”

It may be noted that Section 173 (1A) of CrPC mandates that the investigation into offence under sections 376, 376A, 376AB, 376B, 376C, 376D, 376DA, 376DB or 376E of the IPC shall be completed within two months from the date on which the information was recorded by the officer in charge of the police station.

Appearances

Counsel for Petitioner: Ujjawal Satsangi

Counsel for Respondent: A.S.G.I., C.S.C.

Case title - Vaibhav Kumar Pandey And Another vs. Union Of India And 2 Others [PUBLIC INTEREST LITIGATION (PIL) No. - 9 of 2023]

Case Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AB) 10

Click Here To Read/Download Order