Statutory bail and incomplete investigation: piecemeal charge reports cannot justify continued custody before cognizance.

Statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the Code accrues when investigation is not completed within the prescribed detention period, and custody cannot be extended by resorting to Section 309(2) before cognizance is taken. A charge report covering only some offences does not amount to a final report under Section 173(2) where investigation into the remaining offences is still pending, and the case cannot be split into piecemeal reports for remand purposes. On these principles, the bail refusal was set aside and release on bail was directed on conditions.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether the accused were entitled to statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the Code when the investigation had not been completed within the prescribed period; (ii) Whether a charge report filed only in respect of some offences could be treated as a final report under Section 173(2) of the Code so as to justify remand under Section 309(2) of the Code.

Issue (i): Whether the accused were entitled to statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the Code when the investigation had not been completed within the prescribed period.

Analysis: The right to bail under Section 167(2) arises on expiry of the maximum period of detention during investigation if the investigation remains incomplete. Remand under Section 309(2) is available only after cognizance is taken, and custody cannot be extended during an unfinished investigation by resorting to that provision. The materials showed that investigation into all alleged offences had not been completed within the statutory period.

Conclusion: The accused were entitled to statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the Code.

Issue (ii): Whether a charge report filed only in respect of some offences could be treated as a final report under Section 173(2) of the Code so as to justify remand under Section 309(2) of the Code.

Analysis: The report filed by the investigating agency did not complete the investigation of the entire case, as further inquiry into the other alleged offences was expressly stated to be pending. A criminal case cannot be split into piecemeal reports for purposes of Section 173, and cognizance cannot be taken until a final report covering the completed investigation is laid before the Court. In the absence of such a final report, Section 309(2) could not be invoked to sustain further judicial custody.

Conclusion: The piecemeal charge report was not a final report under Section 173(2), and remand under Section 309(2) was not justified.

Final Conclusion: The order refusing bail was set aside, the revision was allowed, and the accused were directed to be released on bail on conditions, without any opinion on the merits of the allegations.

Ratio Decidendi: During investigation, custody beyond the statutory limit can be authorised only under Section 167(2), and once that limit expires without a complete final report covering the entire case, the accused acquires an enforceable right to bail; Section 309(2) cannot be used to prolong custody before cognizance is taken.

---