Default bail survives incomplete investigation; premature complaint cannot cure the statutory lapse or justify continued remand.

A prosecution complaint filed before completion of investigation does not defeat the accused's indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) CrPC, because the statutory protection depends on completion of investigation within time, not on a premature filing made to avoid that consequence. Continued remand after expiry of the prescribed period is impermissible unless default bail is offered, as detention beyond the statutory limit is inconsistent with the scheme of Section 167(2) and Article 21. The application for default bail was therefore allowed and release on bail directed.

---

---

Issues: (i) Whether a prosecution complaint filed before completion of investigation can defeat the accused's right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. (ii) Whether an arrested person can be continued in remand beyond the statutory period without being extended default bail.

Issue (i): Whether a prosecution complaint filed before completion of investigation can defeat the accused's right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The right under Section 167(2) is intended to ensure completion of investigation within the prescribed time. A filing made only to avoid the consequence of default bail does not cure an incomplete investigation. The entitlement to default bail survives where the investigation remains pending in substance despite the filing of a complaint.

Conclusion: The right to default bail is not extinguished by filing a prosecution complaint before completion of investigation.

Issue (ii): Whether an arrested person can be continued in remand beyond the statutory period without being extended default bail.

Analysis: Continued detention after expiry of the prescribed period, without offering default bail, is inconsistent with the statutory scheme and the protection of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The remand power cannot be used to keep an accused in custody once the default-bail right accrues.

Conclusion: The accused cannot be kept in remand beyond the statutory period without being granted default bail.

Final Conclusion: The application for default bail was allowed and release on bail was directed, as the investigation had not been completed within the statutory time and the accused's accrued bail right remained enforceable.

Ratio Decidendi: An incomplete investigation cannot be used to defeat the indefeasible right to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and detention beyond the prescribed period is impermissible unless default bail is afforded.

---