CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION versus VIKAS MISHRA @ VIKASH MISHRA

Citation: [2023] 3 S.C.R. 321 · Decided: 10-04-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.R. SHAH · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 1 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
321
[2023] 3 S.C.R. 321
321
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION
v.
VIKAS MISHRA @ VIKASH MISHRA
(Criminal Appeal No. 957 of 2023)
APRIL 10, 2023
[M. R. SHAH AND C. T. RAVIKUMAR, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 167(2) – Application
for default bail – Frustration of judicial process by conduct –
Respondent was accused of having committed offence u/s 409/120B
of IPC – On 16.04.2021, the respondent-accused was arrested by
the CBI and was remanded to the CBI custody for a period of seven
days i.e., till 22.04.2021 – However, during the said period the
respondent-accused was admitted in the hospital and thus could
not be interrogated by the CBI – Thereafter, he obtained interim
bail on 21.04.2021 which came to be extended till 08.12.2021 –
Later, the interim bail was cancelled on the ground that the accused
did not appeared before the Special Court despite specific directions
and also did not cooperated in the investigation – Accused was
arrested again and was remanded to judicial custody, but he again
got himself admitted in the hospital for that period – Accused filed
an application for default bail u/s. 167(2) Cr.P.C. on the ground of
non-filing of the charge sheet/report within the prescribed period
of 90 days – Application was rejected – However, High Court
allowed the said application and has directed to release the
respondent on statutory/default bail u/s. 167(2) Cr.P.C. – On appeal,
held: CBI could not interrogate the respondent-accused – Accused
remained in the hospital from time to time – Accused frustrated the
judicial process by his conduct – It cannot be disputed that the
right of custodial interrogation/investigation is also a very important
right in favour of the investigating agency to unearth the truth,
which the accused has purposely and successfully tried to frustrate
– CBI permitted to have the police custody remand of the respondent
for a period of four days.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1. While considering the prayer of the CBI for police
custody for the remainder period of seven days, it is required to
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
322
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 3 S.C.R.
be noted that as such the Special Judge granted seven days police
custody of the respondent-accused on 16.04.2021. The order
granting seven days police custody as such had attained finality.
However, it so happened that before the seven days police custody
is over and before the CBI exercises the power of interrogation
for full seven days which as per the order passed by the learned
Special Judge was available to the CBI, the respondent-accused
got himself hospitalised on 18.04.2021. On 21.04.2021, the
learned Special Judge granted interim bail to the accused. As
per the settled position of law therefore once on bail/interim bail,
during that period there cannot be any police custody. Therefore,
the CBI could not interrogate the respondent-accused for full
seven days under the police custody remand, which otherwise
the CBI was entitled to. That thereafter, the accused remained
in the hospital from time to time during the interim bail which
also came to be extended from time to time. That thereafter, by
order dated 08.12.2021, the Special Judge cancelled the interim
bail by observing that the respondent accused has misused the
interim bail and has not cooperated with the CBI in investigation
and that there was no valid reason for his hospitalisation. The
Special Judge also observed that in view of the non-cooperation
by the accused, the interrogation of the accused under judicial
custody/police custody has necessitated. [Para 6][327-B-F]
2. Despite the fact that on 16.04.2021, the Special Judge
allowed police custody of the respondent-accused for seven days
i.e., up to 22.04.2021, the respondent-accused got himself
admitted in the hospital during the period of police custody, i.e.,
on 18.04.2021 and obtained interim bail on 21.04.2021 which came
to be extended till 08.12.2021 when his interim bail came to be
cancelled by the Special Judge by observing that the accused
has misused the liberty shown to him and during the interim bail
he has not cooperated with the investigating agency. At the cost
of repetition, it is observed that initial order of grant of seven
days police custody attained finality. However, due to the aforesaid
reasons of having got the accused himself hospitalised on
18.04.2021 and thereafter obtaining the interim bail on
21.04.2021, the CBI could not interrogate the accused in the
police custody

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.