Default bail ends when a timely charge-sheet is filed, even if cognizance has not yet been taken

An accused is not entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC once the charge-sheet has been filed within the prescribed period, because timely filing of the charge-sheet completes the statutory requirement and extinguishes the default-bail right. The stage of cognizance is separate from the stage of investigation, and the fact that cognizance has not yet been taken does not revive a right that has already lapsed upon timely submission of the charge-sheet. The accused may still pursue regular bail on merits, but not default bail on the ground of pending cognizance.

---

---

Issues: Whether an accused is entitled to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 after the charge-sheet has been filed within the prescribed period but cognizance has not yet been taken.

Analysis: The statutory right under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 arises only when investigation is not completed and the charge-sheet is not filed within the prescribed time. Once a charge-sheet is filed within time, the right to default bail stands extinguished. The stage of cognizance is distinct from the stage of investigation, and non-taking of cognizance does not revive the default-bail right where the charge-sheet has already been submitted within limitation. The reasoning is consistent with the settled position that filing of the charge-sheet is sufficient compliance with Section 167(2), and the accused may thereafter seek regular bail on merits.

Conclusion: The petitioner was not entitled to default bail, since the charge-sheet had been filed within the statutory period notwithstanding the fact that cognizance had not been taken.

Ratio Decidendi: Filing of the charge-sheet within the prescribed period satisfies Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and the right to default bail does not survive merely because cognizance has not yet been taken.

---