Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is not applicable to a case registered prior to the enforcement of the Code, where the investigation is to be conducted under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898.

S. S. Sandhawalia, J.

1. Is an accused person against whom a criminal case was registered prior to the enforcement of the Code of Criminal Procedure.1973 (hereinafter referred to as the New Code) entitled to the beneficial provisions of Sub-clause (a) of the proviso to Sub-section (2) of Sec.167 of the said Code?

2. The question abovementioned Is the primary and indeed the solitary issue which has been the subject-matter of debate before the Full Bench in this reference. The material facts are not in dispute and lie within a narrow compass. Baldev Singh petitioner was apprehended on suspicion by the police at about 8 A. M. on the 23rd of March, 1974, at a distance of about three furlongs from the Police Station, Ferozepore, towards the side of river Sutlej. On his personal search, incriminating documents purporting to relate to the various Army Units deployed in the Ferozepore area were recovered. On that very day a case was registered against the accused under Sec.3 of the Official Secrets Act and he was taken into custody.

3. The petitioner moved for bail before the Court of Session at Ferozepore which, however, was declined on the 14th of April, 1974. The present petition for bail was moved in this Court on the 28th of May, 1974 and was pressed mainly on the ground that he had remained in custody for more than two months and till that date no final report by the police in his case had been presented before the trial Court and he was. therefore, entitled to be released under Subclause (a) of the proviso to Sub-section (2) of Sec.167 of the New Code. In opposing the grant of bail, the respondent-State contended that Sec.167 abovesaid had no relevance to the petitioners case which was to be investigated under the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898 (hereinafter referred to as the Old Code) wherein no such provision existed on the statute. In view of the significance of this issue, my learned brother Guiral, J. , referred the matter to a larger Bench On the 10th of June.1974 and granted interim bail to the petitioner. The Division Bench constituted in pursuance of the reference abovesaid thereafter referred the same to a Full Bench and that is how the matter is now before us.

4. The salient feature that here stands is the fact that the case against the petitioner was registered on the 23rd of March, 1974, that is 8 days prior to the enforcement of the New Code. However, the present application for bail in this Court made on the 28th of May, 1974 (as also the application made before the Sessions Judge on the 6th of April.1974) was made after the enforcement of the New Code. The core of the matter, therefore. is whether the petitioners case for the purposes of Sec.167 is to be governed by the Old Code or by the New Code.

5. The relevant provision to determine the abovesaid issue is obviously Sec.484 (2) of the New Code which is in the following terms:

484. (1) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1898, is hereby repealed. (2) Notwithstanding such repeal: (a) if, immediately before the date on which this Code comes into force, there is any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending then, such appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation shall be disposed of continued, held or made, as the case may be, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure.1898, as in force immediately before such commencement, (hereinafter referred to as the Old Code), as if this Code had not come into force: Provided that every inquiry under Chapter XVIII of the Old Code, which is pending, at the commencement of this Code, shall be dealt with and disposed of in accordance with the provisions of this Code; (b)* * * * * * (c)* * * * * * (d)* * * * * * (3)* * * * * *

6. Relying upon the above said provision, Mr. D. R Puri on behalf of the petitioner contended that admittedly the present application for bail having been made after the coming into force of the New Code should, therefore, be determined under the p