Default bail under Section 167(2) is not defeated by earlier bail cancellation if statutory filing requirements remain unmet.

Statutory default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 accrues when the investigating agency fails to file the complaint within the prescribed period, and the accused has completed the custody period required by law. The text states that an earlier cancellation of a bail order does not by itself extinguish that beneficial right, so long as the statutory conditions for release continue to exist and the complaint remains unfiled. On that basis, continued detention was treated as unjustified, and the petition for statutory bail was rejected only because the Court found the statutory requirements were not otherwise satisfied.

---

---

Issues: Whether statutory bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 could be denied merely because an earlier bail order had been cancelled.

Analysis: Section 167(2) confers a beneficial right to release on bail when the investigating agency fails to complete the investigation and file the complaint within the prescribed period. The accused had completed sixty days in custody and the complaint had not been filed even when the application was heard. The prior cancellation of an earlier bail order did not take away the statutory right to seek default bail, and the continued contest to custody in the absence of a filed complaint was found unjustified.

Conclusion: The statutory bail could not be denied on the ground of the earlier cancellation order, and the petition was rejected.

Ratio Decidendi: The right to default bail under Section 167(2) accrues on failure to file the complaint within the prescribed period and is not defeated by an earlier cancellation of bail unless the statutory conditions for release are absent.

---