IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Revision No.1370 of 2011 Krishnandan Singh, S/O Late Ganauri Singh, Resident of Village - Simaribigha, Police Station - Warsaliganj, District- Nawada. ………….Petitioner Versus The State of Bihar ………..Opposite Party ---------------------------------- 3. 23.12.2011 The petitioner has preferred this revision application against the order dated 20.10.2011 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in Warsaliganj P.S. Case No.52/2011 by which the prayer of the petitioner to release him under the provisions of Section 167 (2) of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected. The main contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner is an accused under Sections 302, 201/34 of the I.P.C. in Warsaliganj P.S. Case No.52/2011. The petitioner has been in custody since 21.07.2011 and the charge-sheet has been submitted on 20.10.2011. The period of 90 days of the petitioner in custody expired on 18.10.2011 and admittedly, the charge- sheet has been received on 20.10.2011 and as such, in view of the provisions contained in Section 167 (2) of the Cr.P.C., the charge-sheet has to be submitted within 90 days, if the charge-sheet is not submitted within 90 days, the accused is 2 entitled to be released on bail. The petitioner filed petition on 20.10.2011 for his release, which has been rejected by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, which is not in accordance with law. Mrs. I.B. Pandey, the learned counsel for the State, could not controvert the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner. Admittedly, the petitioner has been in custody since 21.07.2011 and the offence is under Sections 302 and 201/34 of the I.P.C. The charge-sheet must have been submitted within 90 days, if the police fails to submit the charge-sheet under 90 days, the accused is entitled to be released under Section 167 (2) of the Cr.P.C. Since, the charge-sheet was not submitted within 90 days, the petitioner should have been released on bail after expiry of 90 days. In this case, the charge-sheet has not been submitted within 90 days and as such, the petitioner is entitled to get the bail under the aforesaid provisions. Considering the facts and circumstances stated above, in my opinion, the impugned order is not fit to be sustained. The impugned order is set aside. The petitioner above-named is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of 3 Rs.10,000/-with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada in Warsaliganj P.S. Case No.52/2011 on the following terms and conditions : (i) One of the bailors will be the close relative of the petitioner, who will produce the petitioner in the court if and when required. (ii) The petitioner will not indulge in similar or in any other offence. (iii) In case of his absence for two consecutive dates or in case of violation of the terms of the bail, his bail bond will be liable to be cancelled by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nawada and he will be taken into custody. In the result, this application is allowed. V.K. Pandey ( Amaresh Kumar Lal, J.)