AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
No AI summary yet
Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.
Judgment
47 paragraphs · 714 wordsGurvinder Singh Gill, J
The petitioner seeks grant of regular bail in a case registered vide FIR No. 117, dated 12.8.2020 at Police Station Jakhal, District Fatehabad, under Sections 22(c) and 27-A of Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act.
As per the case of prosecution, the petitioner was apprehended by the police on 12.8.2020 while in possession of 400 strips (4000 tablets) of ‘Tramadol Hydrochloride’.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. It has further been submitted that the petitioner has been behind bars for a substantial period of more than 2 years and 6 months and since the trial is proceeding at snail’s pace as only 1 PW i.e. ASI Dharampal out of the cited 16 PWs has been examined till date, the petitioner cannot be kept behind bars for an indefinite period. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.
Opposing the petition, learned State counsel has submitted that since it is a case, wherein the petitioner was caught red-handed while in possession of ‘commercial’ quantity of contraband, no case for grant of bail is made out. Learned State counsel has, however, informed that the petitioner as on date has been behind bars since the last more than 2 years and 6 months. It has also been informed that the petitioner is not involved in any other case.
This Court has considered the rival submissions addressed before this Court.
Since the petitioner seeks grant of bail mainly on account of long custody, it is apposite to refer to a few judgments of Hon’ble Supreme Court in this regard wherein Hon’ble Supreme Court has granted the concession of bail solely on ground of long custody :-
Case Number
Date of Decision
Title of case
Period which the accused had undergone when granted bail by Hon’ble Supreme Court.
Criminal Appeal No. 245/2020
07.02.2020
Chitta Biswas @ Subhas Vs. the State of West Bengal
1 year and 7 months
Criminal Appeal No. 668/2020
12.10.2020
Amit Singh Moni Vs. State of Himachal Pradesh
2 years and 7 months
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5769/2022
01.08.2022
Nitish Adhikary @ Bapan Vs. the State of West Bengal
1 year and 7 month
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 4173 of 2022
04.08.2022
Shariful Islam @ Sarif Vs. the State of West Bengal
1 year and 6 months
Criminal Appeal No. 1169 of 2022
05.08.2022
Gopal Krishna Patra @ Gopalrusma Vs. Union of India
2 years 1 month and 17 days
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 5530-2022
22.08.2022
Mohammad Salman Hanif Shaikh Vs. the State of Gujarat
About 2 years
Criminal Appeal No. 2027-2022
22.11.2022
Karnail Singh Vs. The State of Odisha
1 Year and 8 months
Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No. 8653-2022
25.11.2022
Karim Adaldar Vs. The State of West Bengal
10 months
Hon’ble Supreme Court in yet another judgment dated 25.1.2023 arising out of SLP No.6690-2022 titled Dheeraj Kumar Shukla Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh has granted bail in a case registered under the NDPS Act where the accused alongwith co-accused was found in possession of ‘commercial’ quantity of ‘Ganja’ and had been behind bars since the last two and a half years while observing that in the absence of any criminal antecedents, the conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act could be dispensed with at that stage, particularly when there was delay in conclusion of trial.
Having regard to the fact that the petitioner has been behind bars since the last more than 2 years and 6 months and is not shown to be involved in any other case, this Court is of the opinion that provisions of Section 37 of NDPS Act at this stage can be dispensed with in the present case.
The petition, as such, is allowed and the petitioner is ordered to be released on regular bail on his furnishing bail bonds/surety bonds to the satisfaction of learned trial Court/Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate concerned.
It is, however, directed that in case the petitioner is found to be indulging in similar offence again, the prosecution would be at liberty to move an application for cancellation of bail before this Court.