The Supreme Court has put in place a detailed set of safeguards for granting bail to foreign nationals accused of offences involving commercial quantities of narcotic drugs under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
A Bench of Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Augustine George Masih issued the directions while cancelling the bail granted to Nigerian national Chidiebere Kingsley Nawchara, who is facing allegations in a case involving nearly 5 kg of heroin.
The case came under sharper scrutiny after the Court found serious doubts over the genuineness of the surety produced for Nawchara. The address provided by the surety could not be located, the person identified as his employer denied having employed him and the bank account particulars mentioned in the surety bond could not be independently verified.
The Court was further informed that 38 cases investigated by the Narcotics Control Bureau and nine cases handled by the Directorate of Revenue Intelligence involved foreign nationals—particularly from Nigeria and Nepal—who allegedly disappeared after securing bail with suspected fake sureties.
The Supreme Court said the issue indicated deeper weaknesses in the existing system for verifying bail sureties. It noted that cases of impersonation and fabricated sureties appeared to be widespread in certain States and called for a uniform mechanism to prevent such lapses.
Invoking its powers under Article 142 of the Constitution, the Court laid down a series of measures intended to make sure that foreign nationals released on bail remain traceable and that those standing surety for them can be properly verified.
Key safeguards ordered by the Court
A foreign national granted bail must deposit their passport with the jurisdictional court. The court may also prohibit the accused from leaving India without prior permission.
The accused must register with the Foreigners Regional Registration Office (FRRO) within seven days of being released. Written confirmation of the registration must subsequently be submitted to both the investigating officer and the concerned court.
The FRRO, in consultation with the relevant government departments, has been directed to establish a dedicated online portal for this registration process.
The Court has also mandated that a foreign national must ordinarily furnish two sureties for the same amount as the bail bond. Where the accused demonstrates that obtaining two sureties is genuinely impossible despite sufficient efforts, the court may relax the requirement, but only through a reasoned written order.
Three-day verification deadline
The verification of every surety must be completed within three days. The verification report must reach the trial court before the accused is released.
If authorities are unable to complete the process within that period, the reasons for the delay must be recorded and brought to the attention of the concerned court.
The Court has further ordered fresh physical verification of the foreign national’s residential address and other contact details in India within three days of the bail order and before release. This requirement will apply even where those particulars had already been verified during the investigation.
Disclosure of finances and embassy intimation
Before the court, the accused must submit an affidavit setting out the source of income or funds available to them in India, along with details of any bank accounts maintained in the country.
The investigating officer must also formally inform the embassy of the accused’s home country about the person’s alleged involvement in the criminal case.
Central database for accused and sureties
The Ministry of Law and Justice and the National Informatics Centre (NIC) have been directed to develop a centralised database containing details of foreign nationals accused in NDPS cases as well as the persons standing surety for them.
The Court also ordered accountability where a surety that was purportedly verified is later discovered to be fictitious.
Officials involved in the verification process—including police, court and revenue personnel—may face departmental proceedings for dereliction of duty if a fake surety slips through despite an official verification.
The Ministry of Home Affairs and the corresponding authorities in the States have been directed to frame necessary guidelines for action against officials found responsible.
Property of surety to secure bail obligation
The Court has further directed that when a person stands surety for a foreign national accused in an NDPS case, a lien or charge equivalent to the amount of the surety bond must be created over the surety’s property, including immovable assets.
If the accused violates the bail conditions, the concerned court can take steps against the secured property in accordance with law.
Through these measures, the Supreme Court has sought to close loopholes that can allow foreign nationals accused in serious drug cases to obtain bail on the strength of unverifiable sureties and subsequently become difficult to trace.
