Understanding Default Bail and Filing Time Limits Under UAPA Act

In a recent legal case, the court delved into the nuances of default bail and the time limits for filing charges under the UAPA Act. Emphasizing on the fundamental right to liberty, the court highlighted the significance of completing investigations within stipulated time frames. This analysis serves as a crucial reminder of the legal safeguards in place to protect the rights of the accused in criminal proceedings.


  • A second charge sheet was filed after obtaining sanction of the State Government on 05.10.2017.
  • The police were given a total of 180 days to file the charge sheet.
  • The charge sheet was filed on 04.09.2017 under various provisions, excluding the UAPA Act due to the mandatory requirement of prosecution sanction which was pending.
  • The charge sheet listed the accused persons in judicial custody and the upcoming completion of remand period for accused Fakhrey Alam.
  • Charges included sections of IPC, Arms Act, and the UAPA Act against the appellant-accused Fakhrey Alam.
  • The appellant had sought default bail based on the argument that the charge sheet was filed after 180 days.
  • An FIR had been registered against the appellant prior to the application for default bail.
  • The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow passed an order on 13.10.2017 regarding the appellant’s application for default bail under Section 167 (2) of the Cr.P.C. two days before the charge sheet under the UAPA Act was filed.
  • The Court clarified that the second charge sheet was actually a supplementary charge sheet.
  • As a result, default bail was deemed inadmissible due to this clarification.

Also Read: Court’s Jurisdiction in Re-appraising Arbitrator’s Findings


  • Appellant filed an application for default bail on 03.10.2017 within 180 days period.
  • Charge sheet/supplementary charge sheet under UAPA Act was not filed within 180 days.
  • Charge sheet was filed on 05.10.2017 after a lapse of 211 days.
  • In State of Uttar Pradesh, special courts were recently notified about a month back.
  • Special Chief Judicial Magistrate court had jurisdiction in Uttar Pradesh.
  • The second charge sheet is actually a supplementary charge sheet.
  • No restriction on the number of supplementary charge sheets that can be filed.
  • Only one charge sheet can be filed according to the judgment in Vinay Tyagi vs. Irshad Ali case.

Also Read: Contrary Directions in Issuance of Letter of Intent


  • The State cannot take advantage of supplementary charge sheets to extend the time period for filing charges under the UAPA Act beyond 180 days.
  • The accused is entitled to default bail if the charge sheet is not filed within the specified time period under Section 167 of the Cr.P.C.
  • The provision for completion of investigation within a specified time under Section 167 of the Cr.P.C. is crucial for safeguarding the fundamental right to liberty.
  • Default bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C. is a fundamental right granted to the accused.
  • An oral application for default bail is sufficient, as decided in previous court judgments.
  • Legislature’s intent for completing investigation in 24 hours was not feasible in practice.
  • The time limit for filing a charge sheet under the UAPA Act had expired in the case being analyzed.
  • The charge sheet in the present case was required to be filed within 90 days but was actually filed within 180 days based on the UAPA Act charge.
  • The impugned order(s) are liable to be set aside
  • The consequences of the UAPA Act are drastic in punishment
  • The UAPA Act is considered not just a statutory right but part of the procedure established by law under Article 21 of the Constitution of India

Also Read: Application for Stay in Civil Suit Rejected: Court’s Legal Analysis


  • The appellant is entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Cr.P.C.
  • Default bail is granted on the terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the trial Court.
  • The appeal is allowed and the parties are to bear their own costs.


Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000319-000319 / 2021

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *