 Indus official known as the Republic of India Is located in south central Asia, and in both the

eastern &northern hemisphere which shares land border with Pajikistan to west, northern
& Surma.
 It’s bounded by Indus Ocean on the south by certain others. Rules & regulations of Republic
of Indus are Pari material to that of Indian Republic.
 Panjikistan separated from India 1947, 1948 Panjikistan occupied some part of state of
Pammu-kasmir. In 1999 again, pajikistan sneaked into Indus territories, killed innocent
person & destroy government property.
 On 23 Nov. 2015, 12 (Laksher-e-khaiba) territories trained by Pajikistan military &ISO agency
left Pajikistan for trade via sea.
 On 26 Nov. 15, by hijacking a boat owned by fisherman, killed or damaged various assests,
then Art. 51 of UN CHARTER introduce to destroy lower pad of terrorists.
 Surgical strike as carried out on 7oct. 2016 in Pajikistan out of them 1 apprehending
terrorism handed by army to ATS.
 Pajikistan appeal before competent high court of Trombay against dismissal of bail by court
of competent jurisdiction under clause(2) of s. 167 Cr pc for delay filling of chargesheet.

Issue 3:- whether the charge sheet was not filled with in the statutory period of 90 days the accused has
right to be enlarged on bail.

(2) The Magistrate to whom an accused person is forwarded under this

section may, whether he has or has not jurisdiction to try the case, from
time to time, authorise the detention of the accused in such custody as such
Magistrate thinks fit, for a term not exceeding fifteen days in the whole;
and if he has no jurisdiction to try the case or commit it for trial, and
considers further detention unnecessary, he may order the accused to be
forwarded to a Magistrate having such jurisdiction: Provided that-
(a) 1 the Magistrate may authorise the detention of the accused person,
otherwise than in the custody of the police, beyond the period of fifteen
days; if he is satisfied that adequate grounds exist for doing so, but no
Magistrate shall authorise the detention of the accused person in custody
under this paragraph for a total period exceeding,-
(i) ninety days, where the investigation relates to an offence punishable
with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of not less
than ten years;

Case Name:- Dorai And Another vs State Of Karnataka on 27 July,

1994
Equivalent citations: 1994 CriLJ 2987, ILR 1994 KAR 2391, 1994 (4)
KarLJ 492
Bench: S Venkataraman
In this case Karnataka High court held that whether the charge sheet was filed within 90 days, but the
magistrate had not passed an order taking cognizance with in period, it was held that accused as not
entitled to seek bail under proviso to section 167(2) of the code.

Case name:- bupinder singh vs jarnaial singh

In this case supreme court reiterated that permissible limit for filling challan for offence under section
304(b) of IPC is 90 days and if challan is filed within this statutory period, the accused will be entitled to
be release on bail under section 167 of CRPC

Gayasuddian vs state of Jharkhand

In this case the application was filed for release on bail under section 167(2) the charge sheet as filed by
police after the order of release ass passed but before filling of bail bond by the accused it was held that
accused was not entitled for grant of bail. More so because it was shown by material on record that
complicity of accused in alleged offence and allegation were serious in nature.

Applicant : Basir vs state of Haryana

Has ruled that receipt of the charge-sheet in court by itself is no ground for cancellation of bail unless he
furnishes bail which was granted under section 167 (2) of the code.