Default bail under criminal procedure remains subject to NDPS bail restrictions when the special statute's conditions are not met.

In NDPS prosecutions, the default-bail right under proviso (a)(i) to Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not operate independently of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Bail can be granted only if the stringent statutory conditions in Section 37 are satisfied, including reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty and is not likely to commit an offence while on bail. On the facts, there was no delay in forwarding the seized property and no material meeting the Section 37 threshold, so bail was not available.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioners were entitled to bail for failure to file the charge-sheet within ninety days under proviso (a)(i) to Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 notwithstanding the restrictions in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, and whether any delay in forwarding the seized property entitled them to bail.

Analysis: The offences were under the NDPS Act, a special enactment with stringent bail restrictions. The Court held that the proviso to Section 167(2) of the Code does not operate independently to override Section 37 of the NDPS Act in cases covered by that special law. Bail in such cases can be granted only if the conditions in Section 37 are satisfied. On the facts, there was no delay in sending the seized property to Court, and no material was placed to show reasonable grounds for believing that the petitioners were not guilty of the offence or that they were not likely to commit any offence while on bail.

Conclusion: The petitioners were not entitled to bail, as the statutory requirements under Section 37 of the NDPS Act were not met.

Ratio Decidendi: In NDPS prosecutions, the right to seek release under the default-bail provision of Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 remains subject to the mandatory bail conditions imposed by Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

---