Delay In A Trial Could Be A Valid Reason For Granting Bail To An Accused Charged Under The NDPS Act, Despite The Strict Conditions In Section 37 - SC

The Supreme Court recently held that a delay in a trial could be a valid reason for granting bail to an accused individual charged under the NDPS Act, despite the strict conditions outlined in Section 37. Section 37 specifies that bail may only be granted if the court is confident that the accused is innocent and unlikely to commit any further offenses while on bail.

The division bench, comprising Justices S Ravindra Bhat and Dipankar Dutta, acknowledged that such strict conditions may be necessary for the public interest. However, if a trial is prolonged and unjustly affects the accused, then the stringent conditions set out in Section 37 may be subject to constitutional scrutiny. Essentially, the Court emphasized that when considering a bail application, the material on record should be reviewed, and the court should be reasonably satisfied that the accused is not guilty.

After considering the prolonged detention of the appellant for over seven years in an NDPS case, the Court granted bail to the appellant.

This case involved the possession and supply of 180 kilograms of ganja, and the appellant was arrested based on the confessional statement of one of the other arrested individuals. At the time of his arrest, the appellant was 23 years old and was not found in possession of drugs. However, he was charged under Sections 20, 25, and 29 of the NDPS Act, and his bail application was denied by the District Court. The District Court cited the seriousness of the alleged offenses, the severity of the punishment, and the appellant's role in the crime. It was also noted that the appellant had been in regular contact with the co-accused, and important witnesses had yet to be examined.

The appellant then appealed to the Delhi High Court, but his bail was denied based on call records indicating that he was in regular contact with the co-accused, and that money had been transferred from the main accused's bank account to the appellant's account several times. The High Court found that there was a prima facie case against the appellant, and no grounds to rely on the exceptions outlined in Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

As a result, the appellant appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court granted bail to the appellant while noting that the recovery of the drugs was from the co-accused, and there was no evidence of extensive drug dealing by the appellant. The trial was moving at a slow pace, and the Court examined the legal position regarding the strict provisions of Section 37. The Court found that in this case, the appellant had been in jail for more than seven years, and granted bail.