Facts
The respondent was arrested on June 15, 2025, following the seizure of 21.34 grams of brown sugar (intermediate quantity)
Source reference: para. 1, 5He was remanded to police custody on June 16, 2025
Source reference: para. 5Under Section 187(3)(ii) of the BNSS, 2023, the 60-day period for filing a charge-sheet expired at midnight on August 14, 2025
Source reference: para. 15The Investigating Officer filed the charge-sheet on August 14, 2025, but mistakenly submitted it to the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) instead of the Special Judge (NDPS), who held exclusive jurisdiction
Source reference: para. 1, 14On the same day, the respondent applied for default bail before the Special Judge
Source reference: para. 5The CJM committed the case to the Special Judge only on August 21, 2025
Source reference: para. 5The Special Judge granted default bail on August 27, 2025, holding that the prosecution failed to file the charge-sheet before the competent court within the statutory period
Source reference: para. 2Issues
1. Whether a charge-sheet filed within the statutory period but before a court lacking jurisdiction (CJM) instead of the Special Court satisfies the requirements of Section 36A of the NDPS Act and defeats the accused’s right to default bail?
Source reference: para. 6, 122. Whether a default bail application filed on the 60th day—before the right technically accrued at midnight—remains valid and "availed of" once the period expires?
Source reference: para. 6, 15Law Applied
Section 36A of the NDPS Act, 1985, which mandates that offences punishable with over three years' imprisonment are triable exclusively by Special Courts, which take cognizance directly without committal
Source reference: para. 7, 10, 12Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India, establishing that only the Special Court has jurisdiction once constituted
Source reference: para. 11Section 187(3)(ii) of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the 60-day limit for investigation
Source reference: para. 13Enforcement Directorate v. Kapil Wadhawan for remand computation
Source reference: para. 15Uday Mohanlal Acharya v. State of Maharashtra regarding the filing of an application as "availing" the right
Source reference: para. 16M. Ravindran v. Directorate of Revenue Intelligence, which holds that the right persists once the application is filed, regardless of subsequent charge-sheets
Source reference: para. 17Reasoning
The Court reasoned that under Section 36A of the NDPS Act, the CJM had no jurisdiction to take cognizance or receive the police report; therefore, filing the charge-sheet in that court was a non-compliance with the law
Source reference: para. 12, 19Although the prosecution completed the investigation within 60 days, the "filing" only legally occurred when the records reached the jurisdictional Special Judge on August 21, 2025—well beyond the midnight deadline of August 14
Source reference: para. 15, 19Regarding the timing of the bail application, the Court noted that since the application was pending and not rejected as premature when the 60-day period expired at midnight, the respondent's indefeasible right accrued and was effectively "availed of"
Source reference: para. 15, 18The Court emphasized that Section 187(3)(ii) of the BNSS must be interpreted to advance personal liberty
Source reference: para. 19Holding
filing a charge-sheet before a court lacking jurisdiction does not stop the clock for default bail
a pending bail application becomes effective the moment the statutory period expires, granting the accused an indefeasible right to bail if they are prepared to furnish it
Source reference: para. 15, 18The High Court dismissed the Revision Petition, upholding the order of the Special Judge
Source reference: para. 20Original Court PDF
STATE OF SIKKIMvsBishal Saha
Click to open original judgment
Original judgment, available to read, download and summarize on LawLens.in