Conditional liberty overriding statutory embargo u/s 37(1)(b) of NDPS Act may be considered when there is failure to conclude trial within reasonable time: SC grants bail to NDPS Act accused
Justices J. K. Maheshwari & K.V. Viswanathan [28-05-2024]

Read Order: ANKUR CHAUDHARY v. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH [SC- Petition(s) for Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4648/2024]

LE Correspondent

New Delhi, June 11, 2024: While granting bail to a man who suffered incarceration for over 2 years in a case pertaining to the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the Supreme Court has observed that failure to conclude the trial within a reasonable time resulting in prolonged incarceration militates against the precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and as such, conditional liberty overriding the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act can be considered.

The petitioner was in custody for over two years in connection with an FIR registered under Section 8 read with Sections 22 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act). Previously, when the petitioner approached this Court on May 15, 2023, his bail petition was not entertained. However, liberty was granted to approach the trial Court for bail, after the examination of the panch witnesses.

The petitioner informed the Court that the panch witnesses viz., PW3 (Sunder Pal) and PW4 (Vinod Rathore) had been examined and they did not support the case of prosecution. On being applied afresh, the Trial Court rejected his bail application only on the pretext that the Investigation Officer may also be a panch witness who was yet to examine. The High Court also rejected the bail application affirming those findings by the impugned order.

The Counsel for the respondent State submitted that in the facts of this case, the Investigation Officer may be treated as panch witness; therefore, the High Court had rightly rejected the bail application. Therefore, the panch witnesses had not supported the case of prosecution.

On facts, the Division Bench of Justice J. K. Maheshwari & Justice K.V. Viswanathan was not inclined to consider the Investigation Officer as a panch witness. “The failure to conclude the trial within a reasonable time resulting in prolonged incarceration militates against the precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and as such, conditional liberty overriding the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act may, in such circumstances, be considered”, the Bench said.

“In view of the above, we are inclined to allow this petition and direct to enlarge the petitioner on bail on furnishing the suitable bail bonds and sureties and on such other terms and conditions as may be deemed fit by the trial Court”, the Bench ordered.

Allowing the petition, Bench also directed the petitioner to regularly attend the trial until exempted by the orders of the Court. Violation, if any, may give a cause to take recourse as permissible and the trial Court would be at liberty to do the needful.