In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has declared that undue delays in the conclusion of trials can justify the granting of bail under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, despite the stringent conditions usually imposed by Section 37 of the Act.
The bench, comprising Justices JK Maheshwari and KV Viswanathan, emphasized that prolonged incarceration due to trial delays infringes upon the fundamental rights enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India. They stated, “Failure to conclude the trial within a reasonable time resulting in prolonged incarceration militates against the precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21, 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.”
Section 37 of the NDPS Act mandates that bail should not be granted unless there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit an offense if released. However, the Supreme Court’s decision acknowledges that these conditions can be set aside in cases of undue trial delays.
In this particular case, the accused had been in custody for over two years under charges punishable by Sections 8, 22, and 29 of the NDPS Act, without the trial reaching a conclusion. The defense highlighted that the Panch witness did not support the prosecution’s case, and the court found no merit in the prosecution’s argument that the Investigation Officer should serve as a Panch witness.
Consequently, the Court granted bail, citing the prolonged incarceration and trial delays as justification. The decision aligns with previous rulings in similar cases, such as Mohd. Muslim v. State (NCT of Delhi) and Rabi Prakash V. The State of Odisha, where prolonged incarceration was deemed sufficient grounds to override the stringent bail conditions of Section 37.
The ruling reinforces the importance of timely trials and upholds the constitutional rights of individuals, ensuring that delays in the judicial process do not result in unjust and prolonged detentions.
