The ratio decidendi of the judgment is that the interpretation of the phrase "imprisonment for not less than ten years" in the context of Section 167(2)(a)(i) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, is that it refers to offences for which the minimum punishment prescribed is ten years or more of imprisonment. This interpretation means that for offences punishable with a minimum of ten years imprisonment, the period for completing investigation without filing a charge sheet is extended to 90 days, and the accused is entitled to default bail if the charge sheet is not filed within this period. The Court emphasizes that the legislative intent was to classify more serious offences requiring extended investigation time, and the words "not less than ten years" should be given their natural and unambiguous meaning, indicating that the minimum sentence must be ten years or more, rather than offences where the maximum sentence is ten years. Furthermore, the Court underscores that the right to default bail is an indefeasible right that accrues when the statutory period (60 or 90 days, depending on the offence) expires without the filing of a charge sheet, and this right must be exercised by the accused by offering to furnish bail. This interpretation aligns with the legislative history and the fundamental importance of personal liberty, which must be given precedence over technical or procedural formalities.