If by "bad code" you mean something related to syntax, convention, or code that "might have bugs" (wtf), there is still a case it's actually "good code" if it's more readable, was a quicker solution that yields higher profits, is a less error prone approach to the larger management of the codebase albeit less performant etc.
> one difference between crappy code and good code is that in crappy code one is quite sure there are lurking many bugs
Sounds too superficial/judgmental and not evidence-based. If there is a bug there is a bug. Even perfectly written code to the best possible standard can still be code that does the wrong thing.