Default bail in NDPS cases is not triggered by missing FSL reports when the police report is otherwise timely filed.

Non-filing of the FSL report with an NDPS police report does not make the charge-sheet incomplete for Section 173(2) CrPC, so no right to default bail arises under Section 167(2) CrPC on that basis. Applying binding coordinate-bench precedent, the court treated the police report as having been filed in time and held that later filing of the FSL report did not revive a default-bail claim. It also noted that the alleged recovery was of commercial quantity, so bail was independently restricted by Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The application for default bail was therefore not maintainable and bail was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether a charge-sheet filed in an NDPS case without the FSL report is incomplete so as to confer a right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The Court followed the settled position that non-filing of the FSL report with the police report does not render the charge-sheet incomplete for the purposes of Section 173(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Relying on binding coordinate-bench precedent, it held that the police report was filed within time and that the later filing of the FSL report did not revive any claim to default bail. The Court also noted that the alleged recovery was of commercial quantity and, therefore, bail was independently constrained by Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Conclusion: The application for default bail was not maintainable on the ground of non-filing of the FSL report, and the request for bail was rejected.

---