Jigar @ Jimmy Pravinchandra Adatiya vs. State of Gujarat
Background
The appellant and four co-accused were booked under the Gujarat Control of Terrorism and Organised Crime Act, 2015 in an FIR registered in October 2020. Under the special law, the Special Court could extend the usual 90-day investigation period to 180 days based on a report from the Public Prosecutor. In January 2021, such extension applications were filed and granted by the Special Court on the very same day, without the accused being produced before the court (physically or by video conference) or even being informed that such extension applications were pending. The Gujarat High Court rejected the accused's challenge to these extension orders, and the accused (whose applications for default bail, filed after the 90-day period expired but before a chargesheet was filed, had gone unconsidered because of the extension) appealed to the Supreme Court.
Decision Breakdown
Relying on the Constitution Bench decision in Sanjay Dutt v. State (1994), the Supreme Court held that producing the accused before the Special Court (in person or via video conference) and orally informing them that an extension application is being considered is a mandatory procedural safeguard before time for investigation can be extended beyond 90 days, even though the accused need not be given a written copy of the report or a right to be heard on its merits. Since the prosecution admittedly failed to produce the accused or notify them at all, and the record showed no genuine COVID-19 or connectivity obstacle (the reports were filed about a week before the 90-day deadline, giving ample time), the Court held the extension orders were illegal and void. Because the accused's default bail applications were filed before the chargesheet was filed and while no valid extension existed, they were entitled to default bail as of right, and the Court quashed the extension orders and the High Court's judgment, releasing all the appellants (including Jigar) on default bail subject to conditions (bail bonds, passport surrender, no interference with investigation/witnesses, and periodic police reporting).
Lesson Learnt
In cases under special/anti-terror laws that allow extending the police investigation period beyond the normal 90 days, courts must actually produce the accused (or connect them virtually) and inform them that an extension is being sought, skipping this step renders the extension order illegal, and an accused who then applies for default bail before a chargesheet is filed is entitled to be released, even in a serious organised-crime case.