Avtar Singh v. State of Punjab

Judgment

1. The application i.e. CRM-48051-2025 has been filed The application i.e. 2025 has been filed on behalf of the applicant – Avtar Singh under Section 21(5) of the National under Section 21(5) of the National Investigation Agency Act, 2008 read with Section 528 BNSS Agency Act, 2008 read with Section 528 BNSS for condonation of delay of 1415 days in filing the appeal i.e. CRA-D of 1415 days in filing the appeal i.e. CRA D-260-2022. The applicant, in the annexed appeal, assails order dated 11.04.2019 the annexed appeal

11.04.2019 passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court, Amritsar Additional Sessions Judge/ Exclusive Court, Amritsar, vide which his revision petition against order dated 25.02.2019 passed by the SDJM, revision petition against order dated 25.02.2019 passed by the SDJM, revision petition against order dated 25.02.2019 passed by the SDJM, VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 2 ) default bail in terms of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. (now Ajnala, seeking default bail in terms of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. (now Ajnala, seeking Section 187 BNSS) in a case arising out of Section 187 BNSS) a case arising out of FIR No.121 dated 18.11.2018 tered at Police Station Raja Sansi, Amritsar, under Sections 302, 307, registered at Police Station Raja Sansi, Amritsar, under Sections 302, 307, tered at Police Station Raja Sansi, Amritsar, under Sections 302, 307, 452, 341, 427, 34 IPC; Section 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of 452, 341, 427, 34 IPC; Section 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of 452, 341, 427, 34 IPC; Section 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Explosive Act and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18-B of the Unlawful the Explosive Act and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18 the Explosive Act and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18 has been dismissed. Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967, has been dismissed. Activities (Prevention) Act, 1967

2. while pressing upon the aforesaid Learned counsel for the applicant, while pressing upon the aforesaid Learned counsel for the applicant application for condonation of delay of 1415 days application for cond of delay of 1415 days, submitted that as a matter of fact the applicant – Avtar Singh alongwith matter of fact the applicant alongwith co-accused Bikramjit Singh had applied jointly for concession of default bail Singh had applied for concession of default bail in the FIR in question, which was dismissed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial , which was dismissed by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Ajnala on 25.02.2019 and that Magistrate, Ajnala on and that a joint revision petition preferred against the said order i.e. Criminal Revision No.133/2019, was preferred against the said order i.e. Criminal Revision No. preferred against the said order i.e. Criminal Revision No. dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court, also dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court, dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court, Amritsar on 11.04.2019. While the applicant Amritsar on hile the applicant – Avtar Singh did not approach this Court against order dated approach this Court against order dated 11.04.2019, co-accused - Bikramjit Singh had filed a petition in this Court i.e. CRM-M-19259- Bikramjit Singh had filed a petition in this Co Bikramjit Singh had filed a petition in this Co , seeking bail as per provisions of Section 167(2)(a)(i)(ii) Cr.P.C., , seeking bail as per provisions of Section 2019, seeking bail as per provisions of Section which also came to be dismissed on 30.10.2019 which also came to be dismissed on

30.10.2019. Thereafter, co-accused – Bikramjit Singh approached the Hon’ble Bikramjit Singh Supreme Court, wherein his appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.667 of 2020 (SLP (Criminal) No.2933 of appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.667 of 2020 (SLP (Criminal) No.2933 of appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.667 of 2020 (SLP (Criminal) No.2933 of was accepted and he was granted default bail vide order dated 2020) was accepted and he was granted default bail vide order dated was accepted and he was granted default bail vide order dated

12.10.2020 in terms of provisions of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. 12.10.2020 in terms of provisions of Section 12.10.2020 in terms of provisions of Section

Learned counsel submitted that unlike his co Learned counsel submitted t hat unlike his co-accused – Bikramjit Singh, the applicant/appellant was not possessed of sufficient means to approach the applicant/appellant was not possessed of sufficient means to approach the applicant/appellant was not possessed of sufficient means to approach VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 3 ) this Court or Hon’ble the Supreme Court and it was only subsequently this Court or Hon’ble the Supreme Court and it was only subsequently this Court or Hon’ble the Supreme Court and it was only subsequently when Hon’ble the Supreme Court granted bail to co-accused – Bikramjit when Hon’ble the Supreme Court granted bail to co when Hon’ble the Supreme Court granted bail to co Singh that his relatives and friends arranged funds and approached this Singh that his relatives and friends arranged funds and approached this Singh that his relatives and friends arranged funds and approached this may also be granted identical relief Court with a hope that he (applicant) may also be granted identical relief Court with and filed a petition i.e. CRM-M-35642-2020 and filed a petition 2020 under Section 482 read with Section 167(2) Cr.P.C on 28.10.2020 i.e. within Section 167(2) Cr.P.C on within two weeks of the order Bikramjit Singh by Hon’ble the passed in the case of co-accused – Bikramjit Singh by Hon’ble the passed in the case of co . It has been submitted that later on the said petition i.e. Supreme Court. It has been submitted that later on the said petition i.e. Supreme Court CRM-M-35642 35642-2020, came to be treated as an appeal i.e. CRA 2020, came to be treated as an appeal i.e. CRA-D-260- 2022 pursuant t

28.01.2022 passed by learned Single Judge pursuant to order dated 28.01.2022 passed by learned Single Judge appeal has been pending in this of this Court and that as such, the present appeal has been pending in this of this Court and that as such, Court since the last about 5 years. Court since the last about

4. Learned counsel submitted that under these circumstances where an Learned counsel submitted that under these circumstances where an Learned counsel submitted that under these circumstances where an indefeasible right had accrued in favour of the applicant/appellant and indefeasible right had accrued in favour of the applicant/appellant and indefeasible right had accrued in favour of the applicant/appellant and since identically situated co Bikramjit Singh had already been identically situated co-accused – Bikramjit Singh had already been extended the concession of default bail, extended the concession of default bail , the applicant who was a co- applicant with Bikramjit Singh when their joint application for default bail applicant with Bikramjit Singh when their joint application for default bail applicant with Bikramjit Singh when their joint application for default bail also deserves the similar concession particularly when on was declined, also deserves the similar concession particularly when on was declined, account of the protracted trial, his right to a speedy trial in terms of account of the protracted trial, his right to a speedy trial in terms of account of the protracted trial, his right to a speedy trial in terms of Section 21 of the Constitution also stands violated. Section 21 of the Constitution also stands violated. Learned counsel for the applicant/appellant in order to hammer-forth his contention for the applicant/appellant in order to hammer the applicant/appellant in order to hammer condonation of delay places reliance upon a judgment of condonation of delay places reliance upon a judgment of Bombay High Court reported as Faizal Hasamali Mirza Vs. The State of Court reported as Faizal Hasamali Mirza Vs. The State of Maharashtra & others, 2023 (4) Bom CR(Cri) 330. Maharashtra & others, 2023 (4) Bom CR(Cri) 330 Maharashtra & others, 2023 (4) Bom CR(Cri) 330 VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 4 )

5. Opposing the application for condonation of delay, learned State counsel Opposing the application for condonation of delay, learned State counsel Opposing the application for condonation of delay, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for the complainant submitted that in view of assisted by learned counsel for the complainant assisted by learned counsel for the complainant a specific bar enshrined in Section 21 of the NIA a specific bar enshrined in Section 21 of the NIA Act, a delay beyond 90 days cannot be condoned under any circumstance. Learned State counsel days cannot be condoned under any circumstance. Learned State counsel days cannot be condoned under any circumstance. Learned State counsel a judgment of Calcutta High Court reported as in this context cited a judgment of Calcutta High Court reported as in this context cite Sheikh Rahamtulla & others Vs. National Investigation Agency, 2023 Sheikh Rahamtulla & others Vs. National Investigation Agency, Sheikh Rahamtulla & others Vs. National Investigation Agency, r been submitted that the instant SCC OnLine Cal 493. It has further been submitted that the instant SCC OnLine Cal 493 appeal is in fact in the nature of a second revision inasmuch as after a appeal is in fact in the nature of a second revision inasmuch as after a appeal is in fact in the nature of a second revision inasmuch as after a petition under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. had been dismissed by the SDJM, petition under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. had been dismissed by the SDJM, petition under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. had been dismissed by the SDJM, Ajnala on 25.02.2019 , the accused had approached the Court of on 25.02.2019, the accused had approached the Court of by way of a revision petition i.e. Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, by way of a revision petition i.e. Additional Sessio , which was dismissed and as such, once Revision Petition No.133/2019, which was dismissed and as such, once Revision Petition No. been dismissed, the instant petition/appeal is his revision petition had been dismissed, the instant petition/appeal is his revision petition ha virtually in the nature of a second revision, which would not be virtually in the nature of a second revision virtually in the nature of a second revision maintainable. It has further been submitted that maintainable. It has further been submitted that, in any case, having regard to the nature of allegations and the serious crime in which the regard to the nature of allegations and the serious crime in which the regard to the nature of allegations and the serious crime in which the applicant is involved, there is no room applicant is involved, there is no roo taking any lenient view. for taking any lenient view. Learned State counsel, thus, prayed for dismissal of the application Learned State counsel, thus, prayed for dismissal of the application Learned State counsel, thus, prayed for dismissal of the application on the ground that delay remains primarily on the ground that delay remain s unexplained and being more than 90 days, cannot be condoned 0 days, cannot be condoned. We have considered the rival submission addressed before this Court. 6. We have considered the rival submission addressed before this Court. We have considered the rival submission addressed before this Court.

7. Before proceeding further, it is apposite to bear in mind the relevant Before proceeding further, it is apposite to bear in mind the relevant Before proceeding further, it is apposite to bear in mind the relevant developments in the case which for the sake of convenience are being developments in the case which for the sake of convenience are being developments in the case which for the sake of convenience are being reproduced herein under in chronological order: reproduced herein under in chronological or reproduced herein under in chronological or VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) Sr. No.

9. ( 5 ) Date/s Events/Developments

18.11.2018 FIR No.121 dated 18.11.2018, under Sections 302, 307, 452, 341, FIR No.121 dated 18.11.2018, under Sections 302, 307, 452, 341, 18.11.2018 427, 34 IPC; Section 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the 427, 34 IPC; Section 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Explosive Act and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18-B of the UAPA Act Explosive Act and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18 at Police Station Raja Sansi, Amritsar. lodged at Police Station Raja Sansi, Amritsar accused Bikramjit Singh was arrested. 22.11.2018 Co-accused Bikramjit Singh was arrested. 22.11.2018

24.11.2018 Accused Avtar Singh (applicant) 24.11.2018 (applicant) was arrested. Prosecution moved 12.02.2019 Prosecution moved 12.02.2019 Magistrate/SDJM, Ajnala, seeking extension of Magistrate/SDJM, Ajnala, presentation of challan from 90 days to 180 days. 90 days to 180 days. application a before Illaqa extended the period for presentation of 13.02.2019 Learned SDJM, Ajnala extended 13.02.2019 180 days. challan from 90 days to 180 days.

19.02.2019 Period of 90 days expired qua 19.02.2019 co-accused Bikramjit Singh.

21.02.2019 Period of 90 days expired qua 21.02.2019 applicant/accused Avtar Singh.

25.02.2019 Applicant/accused alongwith co 25.02.2019 co-accused Bikramjit Singh moved a joint application under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. seeking default a joint application under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. , which came to be dismissed on the bail before the SDJM, Ajnala, which came to be on the ground that the period for same very day primarily on the ground that the period for completion of investigation already stood extended upto 180 days completion of investigation already stood extended upto 180 days vide order dated 13.02.2019. (Annexure P (Annexure P-2)

06.03.2019 The applicant/accused alongwith co 06.03.2019 The applicant/accused alongwith co-accused Bikramjit Singh i.e. Revision Petition No.91/2019 preferred criminal revision i.e. Revision Petition No. against order dated 13.02.2019 against order dated 13.02.2019 passed by the SDJM extending period from 90 days to 180 days. period from 90 days to 180 days.

10. 25.03.2019

25.03.2019 Revision Petition No.91/2019 /2019 was accepted by the Additional /Exclusive Court, Amritsar (being the ‘Special Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court Court’) holding that SDJM was not competent to grant extension SDJM was not competent to grant extension and that it is only the Special designated Court, which was and that it is only the Special designated Court competent to grant such extension. (Annexure P-4) competent to grant such extension.

11. 26.03.2019

26.03.2019 The applicant/accused alongwith co The applicant/accused alongwith co-accused Bikramjit Singh i.e. Revision Petition No.133/2019 preferred criminal revision i.e. Revision Petition No. against order dated 25.02.2019 passed by the SDJM, Ajnala against order dated 25.02.2019 whereby joint application moved by them under Section 167(2) joint application moved by them under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. seeking default bail has been dismissed. Cr.P.C. seeking default bail has been dismissed 12

26.03.2019 The prosecution presented the challan 26.03.2019 presented the challan against the accused in the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar. Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar.

13. 08.04.2019

08.04.2019 The applicant/accused alongwith co The applicant/accused alongwith co-accused Bikramjit Singh i.e. Bail Application No.1880/2019 moved fresh bail application i.e. Bail Application No.1880 under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 43 167(2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 43-D(2) of Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act before Additional Sessions Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act Judge, Amritsar.

11.04.2019 14. 11.04.2019 Revision Petition No.133/2019 Revision Petition No.133/2019 preferred by (i) applicant/accused alongwith co-accused Bikramjit Singh against applicant/accused alongwith co declining default bail was also dismissed. order dated 25.02.2019 declining default bail VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 6 ) (Impugned order) (ii) Bail Application No.1880/2019 Bail Application No.1880/2019 was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge observing that since challan has Additional Sessions Judge observing that since challan has already been presented, the accused have lost their right for bail already been presented, the accused have lost their right for bail by way of default. (Annexure P (Annexure P-6)

15. 30.10.2019

30.10.2019 Petition i.e. CRM-M-19259-2019 seeking 2019 seeking bail as per provisions of Section 167(2)(a)(i)(ii) Cr.P.C. moved by co-accused – Bikramjit Section 167(2)(a)(i)(ii) Cr.P.C. on 24.04.2019 was dismissed by this Court. (Annexure P- Singh on 24.04.2019 was dismissed 7)

16. 12.10.2020

12.10.2020 Appeal i.e. Criminal Appeal No.667 of 2020 (SLP (Criminal) i.e. Criminal Appeal No.667 of 2020 (SLP (Criminal) filed by co-accused Bikramjit Singh before allowed and the order dated 30.10.2019 passed by this Court has been set aside and co- No.2933 of 2020) filed by co Hon’ble Supreme Court allowed (Annexure P-7) passed by this Court has been set aside accused granted default bail. (Annexure P (Annexure P-8)

17. 06.07.2021

06.07.2021 Review Petition moved by the complainant before the Hon’ble by the complainant before the Hon’ble seeking review of order dated 12.10.2020 i.e. Supreme Court seeking review of order dated 12.10.2020 Review Petition (Crl.) D.No.24123/2020 in Criminal Appeal Review Petition (Crl.) D.No.24123/2020 in Criminal Appeal No.667/2020 dismissed.

18. 26.10.2020

26.10.2020 Applicant/accused filed a petition under Section 482 a petition under Section 482 read with proviso (a) to Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. i.e. CRM-M-35642-2020 proviso (a) to Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. i.e. before this Court seeking his release his release on default bail.

19. 28.01.2022 Learned Single Judge ordered that CRM-M-35642-2020 be 28.01.2022 Learned Single Judge ordered that CRM treated as Appeal and be listed listed before a Division Bench as an appeal under Section 21 of the NIA Act. appeal under Section 21 of the NIA Act.

20. 22.03.2022

22.03.2022 After soliciting orders from Hon’ble the Chief Justice, After soliciting orders from Hon’ble the Chief Justice, CRM-M- treated as Criminal Appeal i.e. CRA- 35642-2020 is ordered to be treated as Criminal Appeal i.e. and is listed before the Division Bench. D-260-2022 and is listed before the Division Bench.

21. 18.04.2022

18.04.2022 The complainant approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court complainant approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court seeking interim relief i.e. stay of operation of order dated interim relief i.e. stay of operation of order dated 28.01.2022 by way of filing SLP(Criminal) Diary No.11983/2022. way of filing SLP(Criminal) Diary No.11983/2022.

22. 09.05.2022

09.05.2022 SLP(Criminal) Diary No.11983/2022 SLP(Criminal) Diary No.11983/2022 is ordered to be dismissed with liberty to urge all the contentions before the as withdrawn with liberty to urge all the contentions before the Division Bench.

23. 19.11.2025

19.11.2025 Keeping in view the pendency of pendency of some of the applications for placing on record several annexures filed at various points of placing on record several annexures applicant/appellant – Avtar Singh to time, this Court directed the applicant/appellant file an amended appeal.

24. 26.11.2025

26.11.2025 Amended CRA-D-260-2022 accompanied by 2022 accompanied by CRM-48051-2025 i.e. application for condonation of delay of 1415 days and CRM- i.e. application for condonation of delay of 1415 days and 2025 i.e. application for placing on record the amended 48052-2025 i.e. application for placing on record the amended Hence, the instant amended appeal. appeal filed. Hence, the instant amended appeal.

8. It is apposite to bear in mind the relevant provisions of the NIA Act It is apposite to bear in mind the relevant It is apposite to bear in mind the relevant pertaining to the maintainability of an appeal against an order passed by pertaining to the maintainability of an appeal against an order passed by pertaining to the maintainability of an appeal against an order passed by VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 7 ) the Special Court constituted under the NIA Act. Section 21 of the NIA the Special Court constituted under the NIA Act. the Special Court constituted under the NIA Act. Act reads as under: Act reads as under: “21. Appeals. (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, an Appeals. - (1) Notwithstanding anything contained in the Code, an al shall lie from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an appeal shall lie from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an al shall lie from any judgment, sentence or order, not being an interlocutory order, of a Special Court to the High Court both on facts interlocutory order, of a Special Court to the High Court both on facts interlocutory order, of a Special Court to the High Court both on facts and on law. and on law. (2) Every appeal under sub-section section (1) shall be heard by a bench of two Judges of the High Court and shall, as far as possible, be disposed of two Judges of the High Court and shall, two Judges of the High Court and shall, within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal. within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal. within a period of three months from the date of admission of the appeal. (3) Except as aforesaid, no appeal or revision shall lie to any court Except as aforesaid, no appeal or revision shall lie to any court from any judgment, sentence or order including an interlocutory order of from any judgment, sentence or order including an interlocutory order of from any judgment, sentence or order including an interlocutory order of ecial Court. a Special Court. (4) Notwithstanding anything contained in sub Notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (3) of section 378 of the Code, an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of 378 of the Code, an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of 378 of the Code, an appeal shall lie to the High Court against an order of the Special Court granting or refusing bail. the Special Court granting or refusing bail. the Special Court granting or refusing bail. (5) Every appeal under this section shall be preferred within a period Every appeal under this section shall be preferred of thirty days from the date of the judgment, sentence or order appealed of thirty days from the date of the judgment, sentence or order appealed of thirty days from the date of the judgment, sentence or order appealed from: from: Provided that the High Court may entertain an appeal after the Provided that the High Court may entertain an appeal after the expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant expiry of the said period of thirty days if it is satisfied that the appellant se for not preferring the appeal within the period of had sufficient cause for not preferring the appeal within the period of had sufficient cau thirty days: thirty days: Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained after the Provided further that no appeal shall be entertained after the expiry of period of ninety days.” expiry of period of ninety days.

9. A perusal of Section 21 of the NIA Act, as reproduced above, shows that A perusal of Section 21 of the NIA Act, as reproduced above, shows that A perusal of Section 21 of the NIA Act, as reproduced above, shows that limitation prescribed for assailing any order passed by the Special the limitation prescribed for assailing any order passed by the Special limitation prescribed for assailing any order passed by the Special Court is thirty thirty days and that the High Court under special High Court under special circumstances may even condone delay to the extent of ninety days. Although it is a may even condone delay to the extent of may even condone delay to the extent of case where there is colossal delay of 1415 days in filing the appeal, but case where there is colossal delay of 1415 d case where there is colossal delay of 1415 d there are certain peculiar and special circumstances which impel this there are certain peculiar and special circumstances which impel this there are certain peculiar and special circumstances which impel this VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 8 ) including the fact that in case the instant Court to condone the delay including the fact that in case the instant Court to condone the delay rtained, the applicant would not be left with any other appeal is not entertained, the applicant would not be left with any other appeal is not ent remedy to avail of his right of default bail. remedy to a vail of his right of default bail. The special circumstances in the present case justifying condonation of delay are enumerated herein- the present case justifying condonation of delay are enumerated herein the present case justifying condonation of delay are enumerated herein under: (i) Unlike an appeal against dismissal of any ‘regular’ bail, Unlike an appeal against dismissal of any ‘regular’ bail, wherein an accused has a right to file successive bail wherein an accused has a right to file successive bail his appeal is not entertained by applications and even in case his appeal is not entertained by the High Court on one occasion on ground of limitation, he the High Court on one occasion ile afresh before the Special Court and can still choose to file afresh before the Special Court and dismissal, he can again approach this Court, the case upon dismissal, he can again approach this Court, the case would stand on a different footing pertaining to ‘default bail’ would stand on a different footing inasmuch as seeking ‘default bail default bail’ is a ‘one-time’ opportunity only. (ii) is entitled to the relief claimed on grounds of The applicant is entitled to the relief claimed on grounds of parity inasmuch as the identically situated co-accused, who parity inasmuch as the identically situated co initially filed a joint application seeking default bail had initially filed a joint application seeking default bail before the Special Court, which had been dismissed, had before the Special Court, which had been dismissed, had later on chosen to approach this Court and upon being later on chosen to approach th had also approached the Hon’ble unsuccessful in this Court, had also approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court, which had accepted his appeal and had Supreme Court, which had accepted his appeal and had granted relief of default bail. It was immediately after the granted relief of default bail. co-accused got relief from Hon’ble the Supreme Court accused got relief from Hon’ble the Supreme Court, the present applicant chose to approach this Court. present applicant chose to approach this Court. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 9 ) (iii) That the applicant has been in custody since the last about 7 That the applicant has been in custody since the last about 7 years and the prosecution has been able to examine only 60 years and the prosecution has been able to examine only 60 PWs out of cited 128 PWs. (iv) The ground of insufficiency of means to approac The ground of insufficiency of means to approach this Court or Hon’ble the Supreme Court earlier, as the co-accused had or Hon’ble the Supreme Court earlier could also be accepted as every person may not approached, could also be accepted as every person may not be in a position to engage a counsel before Hon’ble the be in a position to engage a counsel before Hon’ble the Supreme Court. It is apparent that when there was a ray of Supreme Court. It is apparent that when there was a ray of accused having been granted bail by Hon’ble hope upon co-accused having been granted bail by Hon’ble the Supreme Court in the year 2020, the applicant’s friends the Supreme Court in the year 2020 and relatives, after arranging funds funds, filed this petition/appeal before this Court.

10. Having regard to the aforestated peculiar circumstances particularly the Having regard to the aforestated peculiar circumstances particularly the fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already granted default bail to fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already granted default bail to fact that the Hon’ble Supreme Court has already granted default bail to accused, who had also applied for grant of default bail by way of the co-accused, who had also applied for grant of default bail by way of accused, who had also applied for grant of default bail by way of moving a joint application with the applicant, which was dismissed by a moving a joint application with the applicant, which was dismissed moving a joint application with the applicant, which was dismissed common order, this Court finds that it is a special case where indulgence common order, this Court finds that it is a special case common order, this Court finds that it is a special case could be shown so as to condone the delay and to maintain parity could be shown so as to condone the delay and to maintain parity.

11. there are conflicting judgments of various It may here be mentioned that there are conflicting judgments of various It may here be mentioned that s of the Courts to condone the delay High Courts pertaining to the powers of the Courts to condone the delay High Courts pertaining to the power beyond nine ety days and as of now the said and as of now the said issue is pending adjudication before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the matter before the Hon’ble Supreme Court and the matter is stated to be fixed in the month of March, 2026 without there being any kind of interim the month of March, 2026 without there being any kind of interim the month of March, 2026 without there being any kind of interim s. directions. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 10 )

12. particularly on ground of parity In view of the discussion made above particularly on ground of parity In view of the discussion made above applicant with the applicant herein wherein co-accused, who was a co-applicant with the applicant herein wherein co when the joint application for default bail was dismissed by a common when the joint application for default bail was dismissed by a common when the joint application for default bail was dismissed by a common order, has been granted bail by Hon’bl been granted bail by Hon’ble the Apex Court and e the Apex Court and bearing in mind that it is a case of default bail, which is ‘one time’ opportunity mind that it is a case of default bail, which is mind that it is a case of default bail, which is unlike an application for grant of regular bail, available to the applicant, unlike an application for grant of regular bail, available to the applicant we are of the opinion that a lenient approach can be taken so as to extend we are of the opinion that a lenient approach can be taken so as to extend we are of the opinion that a lenient approach can be taken so as to extend a similar benefit to the applicant as extended to the identically situated co- a similar benefit to the applicant as extended to the identically a similar benefit to the applicant as extended to the identically accused, who has been granted relief by the Hon’ble Supreme Court by accused, who has been granted relief by the Hon’ble Supreme Court accused, who has been granted relief by the Hon’ble Supreme Court setting aside the order of this Court which had upheld the common order setting aside the order of this Court which had uph setting aside the order of this Court which had uph when it is almost 7 years that the declining default bail, particularly when it is almost 7 years that the declining default bail applicant has been languishing in jail and as on date only 60 PWs out of applicant has been languishing in jail and as on date only applicant has been languishing in jail and as on date only cited 128 PWs has been examined. The cited 128 PWs has been examined. The application i.e. CRM-48051- 2025, as such, is accepted and the delay of 1415 days in filing the as such, is accepted and the delay of 1415 days in filing the accompanying appeal is hereby condoned. accompanying ap CRA-D-260 260-2022 The matter in hand pertains to a case arising out of FIR No.121 dated 13. The matter in hand pertains to a case arising out of FIR No.121 dated The matter in hand pertains to a case arising out of FIR No.121 dated

18.11.2018 registered at Police Station Raja Sansi, Amritsar, under 18.11.2018 registered at Police Station Raja Sansi 18.11.2018 registered at Police Station Raja Sansi Sections 302, 307, 452, 341, 427, 34 IPC; Section 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 302, 307, 452, 341, 427, 34 IPC; Section 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 302, 307, 452, 341, 427, 34 IPC; Section 25 of the Arms Act; Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Explosive Act and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18-B of Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Explosive Act and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18 Sections 3, 4, 5, 6 of the Explosive Act and Sections 13, 16, 18, 18 the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act . The said FIR was lodged at the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act. The said FIR was lodged at the n Singh, wherein it has been alleged that on instance of one Arjan Singh, wherein it has been alleged that on instance of was going on at Nirankari Bhawan, Raja 18.11.2018, when a Satsang was going on at Nirankari Bhawan, Raja 18.11.2018, when a Sansi, Amritsar, where about 200 devotees were present, then two young Sansi, Amritsar, where about 200 devotees were present, then two young Sansi, Amritsar, where about 200 devotees were present, then two young a hand grenade on account of boys came on a motor-cycle and lobbed a hand grenade on account of boys came on a motor VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 11 ) which an explosion took place and as many as 22 persons present explosion took place and as many as 22 persons present there explosion took place and as many as 22 persons present sustained serious injuries. Three of such injured also succumbed to the sustained serious injuries. Three of such injured also succumbed to the sustained serious injuries. Three of such injured also succumbed to the injuries. The app is stated to be one of those two persons. The appellant is stated to be one of those two persons. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has falsely been 14. Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has falsely been Learned counsel for the appellant submits that he has falsely been implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that since the implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that since the implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that since the appellant has been behind bars for a substantial period of 7 years, he appellant has been behind bars for a substantial period of 7 years, he appellant has been behind bars for a substantial period of 7 years, he deserves the concession of default bail particularly when his co deserves the concession of particularly when his co-accused Bikramjit Singh has already been granted the same concession way back Bikramjit Singh has already been granted the same concession Bikramjit Singh has already been granted the same concession

2020. in the year 2020 Opposing the appeal, learned State counsel assisted by learned counsel for Opposing the appeal, learned State counsel assisted by 15. Opposing the appeal, learned State counsel assisted by the complainant submitted that since the app the complainant submitted that since the appellant apart from the present case stands involved in , it will not be in societal interest to stands involved in 3 more cases, it will not be in societal interest to Learned State counsel has today filed the custody release him on bail. Learned State counsel has today filed the custody release him on bail. certificate, which is taken on record. As per the said custody certificate, certificate, which is taken on record. As per the said custody certificate, certificate, which is taken on record. As per the said custody certificate, the applicant/appellant has undergone an actual sentence of the applican t/appellant has undergone an actual sentence of 06 years, 11 months & 29 It has also been informed that as on date out of cited 29 days. It has also been informed that as on date out of cited 128 PWs, only 60 PWs have already been examined. 128 PWs, only 60 PWs have already been examined. 128 PWs, only 60 PWs have already been examined.

16. The appellant The appellant having been arrested on having been arrested on 24.11.2018, the police was within the prescribed period of 90 days i.e. by expected to file challan within the prescribed period of 90 days i.e. by expected to file challan

21.02.2019, but the prosecution before expiry of the said period of 90 21.02.2019, but the prosecution before expiry of the said period of 90 21.02.2019, but the prosecution before expiry of the said period of 90 days moved an application to the Illaqa Magistrate i.e. SDJM, Ajnala days moved an application to the Illaqa Magistrate i.e. SDJM, Ajnala days moved an application to the Illaqa Magistrate i.e. SDJM, Ajnala riod of 90 days to 180 days, which was seeking extension of the said period of 90 days to 180 days, which was seeking extension of the said pe accepted vide order dated 13.02.2019. On 25.02.2019, accepted vide order dated 13.02.2019 On 25.02.2019, appellant – Avtar Singh alongwith co alongwith co-accused Bikramjit Singh moved a accused Bikramjit Singh moved a joint application VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 12 ) was dismissed the same very day on the seeking default bail, but the same was dismissed the same very day on the seeking default bail, but the same ground that the period of presentation of challan already stood extended ground that the period of presentation of challan already stood extended ground that the period of presentation of challan already stood extended upto 180 days. Thereafter, appellant alongwith co upto 180 days. appellant alongwith co-accused Bikramjit preferred Revision Petition No.91/2019 before the Additional preferred Revision Petition No.91/2019 Singh preferred Revision Petition No.91/2019 Sessions Judge, Amritsar against the order dated 13.02.2019 extending the s Judge, Amritsar against the order dated 13.02.2019 extending the period of presentation of challan, which was allowed period of presentation of challan, which was allowed vide order dated

25.03.2019. On the next day i.e. 26.03.2019 25.03.2019. .03.2019, while the prosecution presented the challan, both the accused presented the challan, the accused also filed Revision Petition No.133/2019 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar against the No.133/2019 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar No.133/2019 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar order dated 25.02.2019 dismissing their joint application seeking order dated

25.02.2019 dismissing their joint application seeking default bail. After presentation After presentation of challan, appellant and the co ppellant and the co-accused Bikramjit Singh moved moved Bail Application No.1880/2019 l Application No.1880/2019 on 08.04.2019. ide two separate orders dated 11.04.2019, Additional Subsequently, vide two separate orders dated 11.04.2019, Additional Subsequently, v Sessions Judge, Amritsar, dismissed both the petitions moved by the Sessions Judge, Amritsar, dismissed both the Sessions Judge, Amritsar, dismissed both the appellant as well as co-accused Bikramjit Singh i.e. appellant as well as co accused Bikramjit Singh i.e. Revision Petition No.133/2019 and Bail Application No.1880/2019. No.133/2019 and Bail Application No.1880/2019 No.133/2019 and Bail Application No.1880/2019 After 17. After After the dismissal of Revision Petition No.133/2019 and Bail the dismissal of Revision Petition No.133/2019 and Bail the dismissal of Revision Petition No.133/2019 and Bail Application No.1880/2019 filed jointly by the appellant as well as co- Application No.1880/2019 filed jointly by the appellant as well as co Application No.1880/2019 filed jointly by the appellant as well as co accused Bikramjit Singh alone, who accused Bikramjit Singh, it was co-accused Bikramjit Singh alone, who accused Bikramjit Singh, it was co approached this Court seeking roached this Court seeking default bail by bail by way of filing CRM-M- 19259-2019, which was 2019, which was also dismissed vide order dated dismissed vide order dated 30.10.2019. Aggrieved by order dated 30.10.2019, co-accused Bikramjit Singh Aggrieved by order dated 30.10.2019, co Aggrieved by order dated 30.10.2019, co approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing Criminal Appeal No.667 approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing Criminal Appeal approached the Hon’ble Supreme Court by filing Criminal Appeal of 2020 (SLP (Criminal) No.2933 of 2020), which was accepted vide of 2020 (SLP (Criminal) No.2933 of 2020), which was accepted vide of 2020 (SLP (Criminal) No.2933 of 2020), which was accepted vide VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 13 ) order dated 12.10.2020 and he (Bikramjit Singh) was granted default bail order dated 12.10.2020 and he (Bikramjit Singh) was granted default bail order dated 12.10.2020 and he (Bikramjit Singh) was granted default bail in terms of provisions of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. in terms of provisions of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. in terms of provisions of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.

18. The aforesaid factu The aforesaid factual position is not disputed by learn l position is not disputed by learned State counsel, who has however vehemently opposed the appeal primarily on the ground who has however vehemently opposed the appeal primarily on the ground who has however vehemently opposed the appeal primarily on the ground that the appellant stands involved in a commission of heinous offence, that the appellant stands involved in a commission of heinous offence, that the appellant stands involved in a commission of heinous offence, having taken place, it is the stability of the wherein apart from 3 deaths having taken place, it is the stability of the wherein apart from 3 death Nation, which has been targeted by the accused by lobbing a grenade at a Nation, which has been targeted by the accused by lobbing a grenade at Nation, which has been targeted by the accused by lobbing a grenade at religious congregation. Learned State counsel has also argued that the religious congregation. Learned State counsel has also argued that religious congregation. Learned State counsel has also argued that instant appeal is virtually in the nature of a second revision, which is instant appeal is virtually in the nature of a second revision, instant appeal is virtually in the nature of a second revision, barred under the Provisions of Cr.P.C. (now BNSS) inasmuch as a barred under the Provisions of Cr.P.C. (now BNSS) barred under the Provisions of Cr.P.C. (now BNSS) revision against the order dismissing an application for default bail had revision against the order dismissing an application for default bail had revision against the order dismissing an application for default bail had been dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar. been dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge been dismissed by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge

19. We are not impressed with the said argument inasmuch as it is in fact a We are not impressed with the said argument inasmuch as it is in fact a case where the appellant had initially filed a quashing petition under case where the appellant had initially filed a quashing petition under case where the appellant had initially filed a quashing petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. so as to assail order dated 11.04.2019, as this Court Section 482 Cr.P.C. so as to assail order dated Section 482 Cr.P.C. so as to assail order dated while exercising while exercising while exercising inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. circumstances has been interfering even in orders passed by exceptional circumstances has been interfering even in orders passed by exceptional the Revisional Court in case the same are found to be resulting in the Revisional Court in case the same are found to be resulting in the Revisional Court in case the same are found to be resulting in miscarriage of justice or smack of perversity. In any case, the scheme of miscarriage of justice or smack of perversity. In any case, the scheme of miscarriage of justice or smack of perversity. In any case, the scheme of the NIA Act does provide for an appeal against an order passed by the the NIA Act does provide for an appeal against an orde the NIA Act does provide for an appeal against an orde Special Court. The impugned order, in any case Special Court. The impugned order in any case, was passed by the Special Court and under these circumstances, the appeal would very well Special Court and under these circumstances, the appeal would very well Special Court and under these circumstances, the appeal would very well be maintainable. be maintainable. VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 14 )

20. The controversy The controversy in the case in hand narrows narrows down to the relevant dates. The appellant having been arrested on 24.11.2018 The appellant having been arrested on

24.11.2018, the period of 90 days

21.02.2019. The prosecution, however, had chosen to was to expire on 21.02.2019. The prosecution, however, had chosen to was to expire on move an application before the Illaqa Magistrate/SDJM, Ajnala, move an application before the Illaqa Magistrate/SDJM, Ajnala, for extension of time a few days before hand i.e. on 12.02.2019, which was extension of time a few days before hand i.e. extension of time a few days before hand i.e.

13.02.2019. Such extension for presentation of challan was, accepted on 13.02.2019. Such extension for presentation of challan was, accepted on however, set aside upon a joint revision petition having been filed by the however, set aside upon a joint revision petition however, set aside upon a joint revision petition Additional Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court, Amritsar on 25.03.2019. The Additional Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court, Amritsar Additional Sessions Judge/Exclusive Court, Amritsar ial effect of the setting aside of that order was that as on date consequential effect of the setting aside of that order was that as on date ial effect of the setting aside of that order was that as on date when the appellant alongwith co-accused Bikramjit Singh when the appellant accused Bikramjit Singh had moved a joint application seeking default bail on

25.02.2019, the period of 90 days application seeking default bail on 25.02.2019, the period of 90 days had already expired and there was no valid ord had already expired and there was no valid order pertaining to extension of prescribed time period for filing challan. As such, an indefeasible and of prescribed time period for filing challan. As such, an indefeasible and of prescribed time period for filing challan. As such, an indefeasible and an inalienable right came to be vested in the appellant for seeking default inalienable right came to be vested in the appellant for seeking default bail and he accordingly opted to exercise the same by moving an bail and he accordingly opted to exercise the same by moving an bail and he accordingly opted to exercise the same by moving an The law pertaining to grant of appropriate application on 25.02.2019. The law pertaining to grant of appropriate application on default bail in terms of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is well settled. default bail in terms of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is well sett default bail in terms of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. is well sett A Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Apex Court in Sanjay Dutt Vs. State A Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Apex Court in 21. A Constitution Bench of Hon’ble Apex Court in , while interpreting the scope of right of through CBI (1994) 5 SCC 410, while interpreting the scope of right of through CBI accused to be released on default bail in terms of section 167(2) Cr.P.C., accused to be released on default bail in terms of section 167(2) Cr.P.C. accused to be released on default bail in terms of section 167(2) Cr.P.C. held as under: held as under: “48. We have no doubt that the common stance before us of the nature of “48. We have no doubt that the common stance before us of the nature of “48. We have no doubt that the common stance before us of the nature of indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail by virtue of indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail by virtue of indefeasible right of the accused to be released on bail by virtue of Section 20(4)(bb) is based on a correct reading of the principle Section 20(4)(bb) is based on a correct reading of the principle Section 20(4)(bb) is based on a correct reading of the principle indicated in that decision. The indefeasible right accruing to the indicated in that decision. The indefeasible rig indicated in that decision. The indefeasible rig accused in such a situation is enforceable only prior to the filing of accused in such a situation is enforceable only prior to the filing of accused in such a situation is enforceable only prior to the filing of VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 15 ) the challan and it does not survive or remain enforceable on the the challan and it does not survive or remain enforceable on the the challan and it does not survive or remain enforceable on the challan being filed, if already not availed of.” challan being filed, if already not availed of.” challan being filed, if already not availed of.” A Three Judge Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court in Uday Mohanlal A Three Judge Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court i 22. A Three Judge Bench of Hon’ble Supreme Court i Acharya Vs. Vs. State of Maharashtra (2001) 5 SCC 453 State of Maharashtra (2001) 5 SCC 453 dwelled on the expression “if already not availed of” in Sanjay Dutt’s case expression “if already not availed of” in Sanjay Dutt’s case (supra) and held: “13. …… …The crucial question that arises for consideration, therefore, ………The crucial question that arises for consideration, therefore, meaning of the expression “if already not availed is what is the true meaning of the expression “if already not availed is what is the true of”? Does it mean that an accused files an application for bail and of”? Does it mean that an accused files an application for bail and of”? Does it mean that an accused files an application for bail and offers his willingness for being released on bail or does it mean that offers his willingness for being released on bail or does it mean that offers his willingness for being released on bail or does it mean that a bail order must be passed, the accused must furnish the bail and a bail order must be passed, the accused must furnish the bail and a bail order must be passed, the accused must furnish the bail and get him released on bail? In our considered opinion it would be get him released on bail? In our considered opinion it would be get him released on bail? In our considered opinion it would be more in consonance with the legislative mandate to hold that an more in consonance with the legislative mandate to hold that an more in consonance with the legislative mandate to hold that an accused must be held to have availed of his indefeasible right, the accused must be held to have availed of his indefeasible right, the accused must be held to have availed of his indefeasible right, the moment he files an application for being released on bail and offers moment he files an application for being released on bail an moment he files an application for being released on bail an to abide by the terms and conditions of bail. To interpret the to abide by the terms and conditions of bail. To interpret the to abide by the terms and conditions of bail. To interpret the expression “availed of” to mean actually being released on bail expression “availed of” to mean actually being released on bail expression “availed of” to mean actually being released on bail after furnishing the necessary bail required would cause great after furnishing the necessary bail required would cause great after furnishing the necessary bail required would cause great injustice to the accused and would defeat the very purpose of the injustice to the accused and would defeat the very purpos injustice to the accused and would defeat the very purpos proviso to Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and proviso to Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and proviso to Section 167(2) of the Criminal Procedure Code and further would make an illegal custody to be legal, inasmuch as after further would make an illegal custody to be legal, inasmuch as after further would make an illegal custody to be legal, inasmuch as after the expiry of the stipulated period the Magistrate had no further the expiry of the stipulated period the Magistrate had no further the expiry of the stipulated period the Magistrate had no further jurisdiction to remand and such custody of the accused is without jurisdiction to remand and such custody of the accu jurisdiction to remand and such custody of the accu any valid order of remand…… any valid order of remand…… ….. ……. ….. In the aforesaid premises, we are of the considered ….. ……. ….. In the aforesaid premises, we are of the considered ….. ……. ….. In the aforesaid premises, we are of the considered opinion that an accused must be held to have availed of his right opinion that an accused must be held to have availed of his right opinion that an accused must be held to have availed of his right flowing from the legislative mandate engrafted in the proviso to flowing from the legislative mandate engrafted in the proviso to flowing from the legislative mandate engrafted in the proviso to ) of Section 167 of the Code if he has filed an sub-section (2) of Section 167 of the Code if he has filed an application after the expiry of the stipulated period alleging that no application after the expiry of the stipulated period alleging that no application after the expiry of the stipulated period alleging that no challan has been filed and he is prepared to offer the bail that is challan has been filed and he is prepared to offer the bail that is challan has been filed and he is prepared to offer the bail that is ordered, and it is found as a fact that no challan has been filed ordered, and it is found as a fact that no challan has been filed ordered, and it is found as a fact that no challan has been filed hin the period prescribed from the date of the arrest of the within the period prescribed from the date of the arrest of the accused. In our view, such interpretation would subserve the accused. In our view, such interpretation would subserve the accused. In our view, such interpretation would subserve the VIMAL KUMAR 2025.12.19 15:12 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRA-D-260-2022 (O&M) 2022 (O&M) ( 16 ) purpose and the object for which the provision in question was purpose and the object for which the provision in question was purpose and the object for which the provision in question was brought on to the statute-book. In such a case, therefore, brought on to the statute book. In such a case, therefore, even if the application for consideration of an order of being released on bail application for consideration of an order of being released on bail application for consideration of an order of being released on bail is posted before the court after some length of time, or even if the is posted before the court after some length of time, or even if the is posted before the court after some length of time, or even if the Magistrate refuses the application erroneously and the accused Magistrate refuses the application erroneously and the accused Magistrate refuses the application erroneously and the accused moves the higher forum for getting a formal order of being released moves the higher forum for getting a formal order of bei moves the higher forum for getting a formal order of bei on bail in enforcement of his indefeasible right, then filing of on bail in enforcement of his indefeasible right, then filing of on bail in enforcement of his indefeasible right, then filing of challan at that stage will not take away the right of the challan at that stage will not take away the right of the challan at that stage will not take away the right of the accused.…….. ………. accused …… …… … But so long as the accused files an application and …… …… …But so long as the accused files an application and indicates in the application to offer bail on being released by indicates in the application to offer ba indicates in the application to offer ba appropriate orders of the court then the right of the accused on appropriate orders of the court then the right of the accused on appropriate orders of the court then the right of the accused on being released on bail cannot be frustrated on the off chance of the being released on bail cannot be frustrated on the off chance of the being released on bail cannot be frustrated on the off chance of the Magistrate not being available and the matter not being moved, or Magistrate not being available and the matter not being moved, or Magistrate not being available and the matter not being moved, or refuses to pass an order and the that the Magistrate erroneously refuses to pass an order and the that the Magistrate erroneously matter is moved to the higher forum and a challan is filed in matter is moved to the higher forum and a challan is filed in matter is moved to the higher forum and a challan is filed in interregnum. …… ….. interregnum. ….. ……. The expression “if not already availed of” used by this ….. ……. The expression “if not already availed of” used by this ….. ……. The expression “if not already availed of” used by this