Union of India v. Shahid and others, arising out of D.R.I., Crime No
Case Details
Acts & Sections
Cited in this judgment
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. The recovery is doubtful. There is no compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act. The applicant has been sentenced for 10 years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 20/29 and 27A of NDPS Act. Out of ten years, the applicant has already incarcerated for more than seven years in jail. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that rights of the applicant enshrined under Article 21 cannot be ignored inspite of stringent condition under Section 37 of NDPS Act. Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the applicant is the main accused and he has been apprehended from the spot. The recovered quantity is above commercial, therefore he is not entitled for bail. Perused the record of the case and also the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narcotic Control Bureau vs. Lakhwinder Singh, decided on 29.01.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.475 of 2025. Para 7 of the said judgment is as under:- "7. At this stage, the learned ASG appearing for the petitioner submitted that the power of the Court was constrained by Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which is applicable even at the stage of an appeal. He relies upon a decision of this Court in the case of Dadu vs. State of Maharashtra2. There is no dispute about the fact that the Appellate Court is bound by constraints of Section 37 of the NDPS Act while considering the prayer for the grant of bail during the pendency of an appeal. However, if, in the facts of the case, an accused has undergone a substantial part of the substantive sentence and, considering the pendency of criminal appeals, his appeal is not likely to be heard before the accused undergoes the entire sentence, the Appellate Court can exercise the power of 2 (2000) 8 SCC 437 releasing the accused on bail pending the appeal. If the relief of bail is denied in such a factual situation only on the grounds of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, it will amount to the violation of the rights of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India." From perusal of the record, it appears that in this case also the applicant admittedly is languishing in jail for more than 7 years, out of total sentence of 10 years. He has already undergone more than 70% of his sentence. Considering the pendency of appeal in this Court, this appeal is not likely to be heard in near future and the rights of applicant enshrined under Article 21 cannot be allowed to be violated on the ground of Section 37 of NDPS Act. For the aforesaid reasons, the bail application is allowed. Let the appellant-applicant Shahid, involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The appellant-applicant shall cooperate in the disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment. (ii) The appellant-applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Renu/-
Learned counsel for the applicant submits that there is no independent witness of the alleged recovery. The recovery is doubtful. There is no compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act. The applicant has been sentenced for 10 years rigorous imprisonment under Sections 20/29 and 27A of NDPS Act. Out of ten years, the applicant has already incarcerated for more than seven years in jail. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that rights of the applicant enshrined under Article 21 cannot be ignored inspite of stringent condition under Section 37 of NDPS Act. Learned counsel for the respondent has opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the applicant is the main accused and he has been apprehended from the spot. The recovered quantity is above commercial, therefore he is not entitled for bail. Perused the record of the case and also the judgment of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Narcotic Control Bureau vs. Lakhwinder Singh, decided on 29.01.2025 passed in Criminal Appeal No.475 of 2025. Para 7 of the said judgment is as under:- "7. At this stage, the learned ASG appearing for the petitioner submitted that the power of the Court was constrained by Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which is applicable even at the stage of an appeal. He relies upon a decision of this Court in the case of Dadu vs. State of Maharashtra2. There is no dispute about the fact that the Appellate Court is bound by constraints of Section 37 of the NDPS Act while considering the prayer for the grant of bail during the pendency of an appeal. However, if, in the facts of the case, an accused has undergone a substantial part of the substantive sentence and, considering the pendency of criminal appeals, his appeal is not likely to be heard before the accused undergoes the entire sentence, the Appellate Court can exercise the power of 2 (2000) 8 SCC 437 releasing the accused on bail pending the appeal. If the relief of bail is denied in such a factual situation only on the grounds of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, it will amount to the violation of the rights of the accused under Article 21 of the Constitution of India." From perusal of the record, it appears that in this case also the applicant admittedly is languishing in jail for more than 7 years, out of total sentence of 10 years. He has already undergone more than 70% of his sentence. Considering the pendency of appeal in this Court, this appeal is not likely to be heard in near future and the rights of applicant enshrined under Article 21 cannot be allowed to be violated on the ground of Section 37 of NDPS Act. For the aforesaid reasons, the bail application is allowed. Let the appellant-applicant Shahid, involved in aforesaid case be released on bail on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties of the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned subject to following conditions:- (i) The appellant-applicant shall cooperate in the disposal of appeal without seeking unnecessary adjournment. (ii) The appellant-applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail. Order Date :- 11.3.2025 Renu/-