The right to get this bail is an indefeasible right and this right must be exercised by the accused by offering to furnish bail
83. This Court in a large number of judgments has held that the right to legal aid is also a fundamental right. Legal aid has to be competent legal aid and, therefore, it is the duty of the counsel representing the accused whether they are paid counsel or legal aid counsel to inform the accused that on the expiry of the statutory period of 60/90 days, they are entitled to ‘default bail’. In my view, the magistrate should also not encourage wrongful detention and must inform the accused of his right. In case the accused still does not want to exercise his right then he shall remain in custody but if he chooses to exercise his right and is willing to furnish bail he must be enlarged on bail.
84. In view of the above discussion, my findings are as follows:
84.1. I agree with both my learned brothers that the amendment made to the Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 by the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013 applies to all accused charged with offences under this Act irrespective of the fact whether the action is initiated under the Lokpal and Lokayuktas Act, 2013, or any other law;
84.2 Section 167(2)(a)(i) of the Code is applicable only in cases where the accused is charged with (i) offences punishable with death and any lower sentence; (ii) offences punishable with life imprisonment and any lower sentence and (iii) offences punishable with minimum sentence of 10 years;
84.3. In all cases where the minimum sentence is less than 10 years but the maximum sentence is not death or life imprisonment then Section 167(2) (a)(ii) will apply and the accused will be entitled to grant of ‘default bail’ after 60 days in case charge-sheet is not filed.
84.4. The right to get this bail is an indefeasible right and this right must be exercised by the accused by offering to furnish bail
Rakesh Kumar Paul v. State of Assam , 2017(15) SCC 67
