Latest News
Back
Document:
Delhi HC: Under S. 167 CrPC, Accused is Entitled to Default Bail Even in the Absence of a Bail Application
In the case of Subhash Bahadur vs. The State (N.C.T of Delhi), the Delhi High Court provided the clarification that the indisputable right of default bail under Section 167 (2)(a) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 does not hinge upon an accused specifically invoking the provision in his application for bail. It was observed that after the lapse of the statutory period of sixty days or ninety days has expired, the accused would automatically be entitled to bail provided he satisfies the set conditions. The Court held that it is vital to note that there is no provision requiring him to make any formal application for the bail.
In the instant case, the petitioner was arrested on 10.01.2020 and his detention in custody for a period of Sixty days expired on 10.03.2020. As per Section 167(2), the statutory time period had lapsed. Therefore it was contended that the petitioner became entitled to bail in default under Section 167(2) Proviso (a) of the CrPC. The Court also referred to the case of Hussainara Khatoon and Ors. Vs. Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna: (1980) 1 SCC 108 in which the Supreme Court held that, when an undertrial prisoner is produced before the magistrate after the lapse of the statutory time period, the magistrate before ordering for further judicial remand, should point out to the undertrial prisoner that he is entitled to be released on bail. The Court also observed that while adapting this principle, it’s the Court's responsibility to know the accused person before defaulting him the bail. The Court referred to many Supreme Court precedents where the Court intrinsically linked Proviso (a) of Section 167(2) of CrPC to Article 21 of the Constitution of India stating that “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to the procedure established by law”. The court, therefore, held that it's vital to protect the rights of the accused during the pendency of the investigation. Therefore, the High Court clarified that the petitioner would be entitled to default bail, also looking into the facts of the case it was noticed that the petitioner unequivocally desires to be released on bail and he is ready to furnish surety for the same.
Document:
