Kanoon Ki Dastak
Jammu, May 27: In a crucial development reinforcing the constitutional mandate of a fair and speedy trial, the High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has ruled that an accused is entitled to bail on the ground of undue delay in trial, even in cases involving commercial quantity under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
The ruling clarifies that the statutory restrictions contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot override the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The judgment was delivered by Justice Sanjeev Kumar while deciding Bail Applications filed by two accused persons in a case registered under Sections 8/15/29 of the NDPS Act for allegedly transporting 340 kilograms of poppy straw, classified as a commercial quantity.
The accused had been in custody since February 2020, and despite the filing of the charge sheet in June 2020 and framing of charges in December 2020, only a few prosecution witnesses had been examined by March 2024.
The High Court found that the accused were not responsible for the delay, which had occurred due to the non-availability of the Presiding Officer and failure of the prosecution to produce witnesses.
In a strongly worded observation, Justice Sanjeev Kumar stated:
“The right to speedy trial is a most vital attribute of fair trial rights of the accused implicit in Article 21 of the Constitution of India and, therefore, grant of bail on account of undue delay in trial is not fettered by Section 37 of the NDPS Act.”
The Court referred to the Supreme Court’s ruling in Mohd. Muslim @ Hussein v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2023) and Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee v. Union of India (1994), both of which stress that prolonged detention without trial violates the fundamental rights of the accused, and bail may be granted irrespective of the bar under special statutes in such situations.
While acknowledging the seriousness of offences under the NDPS Act and the legislative intent behind Section 37, the Court made it clear that constitutional protections take precedence. It noted that the petitioners had already undergone more than half of the minimum punishment prescribed for the offence and were entitled to be released on bail.
The Court ordered the release of both accused on the following conditions:
Furnishing personal bonds of ₹1,00,000 each with two sureties; Fortnightly appearance at Police Station Ghagwal; Restriction on leaving the jurisdiction of the trial court without prior permission; Surrender of passports, or affidavits confirming non-possession; Non-interference with prosecution witnesses.