Transitional criminal procedure: bail under the new remand provision did not apply to a saved pre-commencement investigation.

A pending investigation that began before the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 came into force, and was preserved by the saving clause, had to continue under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 as if the new Code had not commenced. Under that transitional regime, the later bail entitlement in the proviso to section 167(2) of the 1973 Code did not apply retrospectively. The accused therefore could not claim release on bail under that proviso for the saved pre-commencement investigation.

---

---

Issues: Whether the proviso to section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 entitled accused persons to be released on bail where the investigation had commenced before the new Code came into force and was saved by section 484(2)(a).

Analysis: The relevant investigation was pending immediately before the new Code commenced, so section 484(2)(a) required that it be continued in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 as if the new Code had not come into force. Under the old Code, section 167 permitted remand only up to fifteen days in the whole during investigation, while any further remand during investigation depended on the court's power under section 344 of the old Code. The later proviso to section 167(2) of the new Code, which provides for release on bail after sixty days, was held to govern investigations under the new regime and not to apply retrospectively to a pending investigation saved by section 484(2)(a).

Conclusion: The accused could not claim release on bail under the proviso to section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for a pre-commencement investigation saved under section 484(2)(a). The appeal failed.

---