Default bail accrues when no valid charge-sheet is on record and investigation time is not validly extended.

On expiry of the statutory investigation period under Section 167(2) CrPC, an accused acquires an indefeasible right to default bail if no valid final report under Section 173 is on record and bail is applied for with readiness to furnish sureties. A report returned by the Magistrate for non-compliance is not an effective charge-sheet for this purpose. The Court also held that time for completing investigation cannot be enlarged merely because a prosecution statement is recorded; extension requires express statutory authority, which was absent. The appellants were therefore entitled to default bail, and the refusal to grant bail was set aside.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the appellants acquired an indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 when no valid charge-sheet was on record before expiry of the prescribed period. (ii) Whether the High Court's order recording the prosecution's statement could be treated as extending the time for completion of investigation.

Issue (i): Whether the appellants acquired an indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 when no valid charge-sheet was on record before expiry of the prescribed period.

Analysis: The statutory scheme requires investigation to be completed within the prescribed period and, on expiry of that period, the accused becomes entitled to be released on bail if an appropriate application is made and bail is furnished. A report that is returned by the Magistrate for want of compliance does not amount to a report available for consideration on the expiry of the statutory period. Since no effective report under Section 173 was on record when the period expired, the appellants' right under Section 167(2) matured.

Conclusion: The right to default bail had accrued in favour of the appellants.

Issue (ii): Whether the High Court's order recording the prosecution's statement could be treated as extending the time for completion of investigation.

Analysis: The Code does not confer power on any court to extend the statutory period for completing investigation unless such power is expressly created by a special enactment. Mere recording of a submission that investigation would be completed within a further period does not amount to an extending time. In the absence of a statutory provision authorising extension, the High Court's order could not be construed as enlarging the period under Section 167.

Conclusion: The time for investigation was not validly extended.

Final Conclusion: The appellants were entitled to default bail and the refusal to grant bail was set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: On expiry of the statutory period for investigation, an indefeasible right to default bail arises if no valid final report is on record and that right cannot be defeated by a judicial order or recording of consent that does not rest on express statutory power to extend time.

---