Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 52A, 53, 57 -- NDPS Case – Acquittal -- Sample of contraband/ narcotic substance – Presence/ Certification by Magistrate – Requirement of -- No evidence on record to the effect that the procedure prescribed under sub-sections (2), (3) and (4) of Section 52A of the NDPS Act was followed -- In the absence of any material on record to establish that the samples of the seized contraband were drawn in the presence of the Magistrate and that the inventory of the seized contraband was duly certified by the Magistrate, seized contraband and the samples drawn therefrom would not be a valid piece of primary evidence in the trial -- Trial as a whole stands vitiated – Held, failure of the concerned authorities to lead primary evidence vitiates the conviction – Conviction and sentence/ fine set aside – Appeal allowed.

(Para 12-19)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 167(2) – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985) -- NDPS case – Challan without FSL – Default bail – Recovery of 154 Kgs of Ganja Patti -- As the challan had been filed without the FSL report, the petitioner would be entitled to be released on default bail in terms of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C -- Petition allowed.

(Para 11)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 91, 92, 482 – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22(c), 29, 61, 85 -- NDPS case – Procuring Tower location and call details of mobile -- Prosecution alleges the apprehension of the petitioner on 10.10.2021, whereas petitioner contends that he had been arrested on 09.10.2021 at about 8 PM -- Prosecution alleges that petitioner had been arrested from main highway Rajpura, Sirhind; whereas petitioner contends that he was abducted by the police from near his house at Delhi -- Direction given that tower location and call details of the mobile of the petitioner be preserved for the period 09.10.2021 to 11.10.2021 and the same be produced in the Court and the copy thereof be also provided to the petitioner.

(Para 7-10)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 17 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – NDPS case – Regular  bail – Recovery of 1.5 kg of opium -- Custody 3 months and 3 days -- Petitioner on interim bail since 29.09.2022, not misused the liberty granted; not involved in any other case under NDPS Act; challan was presented on 20.08.2022, however, charges have not yet been framed and in all there are 16 witnesses -- Trial is likely to take a considerable time, thus his further incarceration would not serve any useful purpose -- Regular bail allowed.

(Para 2, 6, 7)

A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 25, 35 – NDPS case – Transportation of poppy husk -- Punishment for allowing vehicle -- Presumption of culpable mental state -- Crucial words used in section 25 are “knowingly permits it to be used for the commission of the offense by any other persons.” -- Intent of Section 25 and Section 35 is parametria the same but carves a special role upon the investigation while proving an offense u/s 25 of the NDPS Act because of the usage of the word “knowingly.” -- Thus, the presumption u/s 35 of the NDPS Act is similar to the intent of Section 25 of the NDPS Act, and as such, Section 35 of the NDPS Act would not dilute the burden that the Legislature had put upon the investigator in section 25 of the NDPS Act – Held, presumption u/s 35 of the NDPS Act would not apply in the case u/s 25 of the NDPS Act if there is not even an iota of evidence regarding knowingly permitting the usage of the things mentioned in Section 35 of the NDPS Act for the commission of the offence.

(Para 13)

B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 25, 35 – NDPS case – Transportation of poppy husk – No evidence that the appellant knew about the other two convicts transporting the poppy husk in his tractor trolly or that he had permitted them to do so for this purpose -- Essential requirements to prove knowledge are missing -- Impugned judgment convicting the appellant u/s 25 of the NDPS Act is not in consonance with the law -- Appeal allowed, appellant acquitted.

(Para 14)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 50 – NDPS case -- Offer u/s 50 of the NDPS Act -- Independent witness did not support the case of the prosecution -- As per Section 50 of the NDPS Act, option required to be given was that he has a right to be searched in the presence of a Magistrate or a Gazetted Officer; whereas the option which was given to him was that whether the accused opted to be searched before a Gazetted Officer or a Civil Gazetted Officer or before him – Word ‘Magistrate’ was missing from the notice -- Mandatory provisions of Section 50 of the NDPS Act were not complied with, which goes to the root of the case and no conviction can be based on such a defective option – Impugned judgment of conviction and sentence cannot be upheld -- Appeal allowed, bail bonds discharged.

(Para 9, 11)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21, 22, 25, 29 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Regular bail -- Petitioner has undergone more than 04 years of custody -- No contraband has been recovered from him coupled with the fact that no other material except the disclosure statement of the co-accused has been brought to the notice of this Court so as to connect the petitioner with the allegation alleged in the FIR, the petitioner has made out a case for the grant of regular bail.

(Para 7)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 2 (xxiii-a), 2 (vii-a), 8, 20 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – NDPS Case -- Regular bail – Recovery of 795 grams of charas from the petitioner – Petitioner is in custody since 26.04.2023 -- As per Table prepared u/s 2 (xxiii-a) and Section 2 (vii-a) of the Act, 1985, lesser than 100 grams of charas is small quantity and greater than 01 Kilogram of charas is commercial quantity (Entry No.23) – There is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period --  Bail allowed.

(Para 2-8)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS Case – Regular bail -- Recovery of 41.26 grms. of Heroin on secret information -- As per the pleadings it is a case of false implication and the petitioner was forcibly picked up in a private vehicle by Crime Branch and thereafter implicated in the present case – Recovery from the petitioner is of non-commercial quantity and he is in custody since 07.04.2023, challan stands presented qua the petitioner -- Conclusion of trial is likely to take time, no useful purpose would be served by depriving the personal liberty of the petitioner – Bail granted.

(Para 5)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21, 27-A – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – NDPS Case – Regular bail – Jump of bail – Recovery of 6 gram of smack – Though the conduct of the petitioner having misused the concession of bail twice does not merit any relief -- However, keeping in view the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the petitioner has suffered incarceration of more than 1 year, 2 months and 18 days and no other case is pending against him as on date under the NDPS Act -- Petitioner ordered to be released on bail with conditions.

(Para 1-5)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22(c), 25, 29 -- Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988), Section 7, 13 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B – Regular bail on parity – More FIRs pending – Effect of -- State opposes the prayer for grant of bail and submits that petitioner is involved in number of FIRs -- However, State is not in a position to distinguish the case of the petitioner qua the co-accused so far as grant of bail is concerned – Without commenting on the merits of the case, on the basis of parity of petitioner vis-a-vis co-accused, the petitioner granted bail.

(Para 5)

Constitution of India, Article 22(5), 226 – Prevention of Illicit Traffic in Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1988 (46 of 1988), Section 3, 4 -- Jammu and Kashmir Public Safety Act, 1978 (VI of 1978), Section 13 -- Quashing of detention order -- Non supply of the dossier to the detenu – Legality of -- Detenu cannot be expected to make a meaningful exercise of his Constitutional and Statutory rights guaranteed under Article 22(5) of the Constitution of India and Section 13 of the J&K Public Safety Act, 1978, unless and until the material on which detention order is based, is supplied to him – Failure on part of detaining authority to supply material, relied at the time of making detention order to detenu, renders detention order illegal and unsustainable – Petition allowed, Jail Superintendent directed to release the detenu forthwith.

(Para 4-7)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21, 22, 29 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS Case -- Interim bail – Marriage of petitioner -- Marriage fixed for 16.06.2023 & 17.06.2023, the petition allowed on humanitarian grounds and the petitioner is ordered to be released on interim bail on his furnishing personal bond to the tune of Rs. 10,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Jail Superintendent w.e.f. 14.06.2023 to 23.06.2023.

(Para 1, 4)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 18, 25, 29, 37 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- NDPS case – Regular bail – Commercial quantity – Rigour of Section 37 of NDPS Act – Speedy trial -- Petitioner in custody since 1.6.2021 -- Trial is not likely to conclude within short time -- Indisputably, accused has constitutional right for speedy trial -- Weighed against such constitutional right, it cannot be said that the rigors of Section 37 of the Act can have efficacy in perpetuate and more particularly in case where trial is not concluded within a reasonable period -- Nothing on record to suggest that the delay in trial has been caused for any reason attributable to the petitioner – Petition allowed, petitioner ordered to be release on bail.

(Para 6-9, 17)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 20 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 – NDPS case – Anticipatory bail – Cultivation of 278 plants of cannabis –Demarcation got conducted, which reveals that concerned khasra number though was in possession of accused, but was under co-ownership of several individuals – Custodial interrogation of accused not required by the Investigating Agency – Anticipatory bail granted.

(Para 3-5)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22 -- NDPS case – Interim regular bail -- Marriage of daughter – Petitioner allowed to attend the marriage of his daughter only for 01 day in police custody.

(Para 7)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22(c) -- NDPS Case – Acquittal – FSL Report – Case property travelled in an untampered condition to the FSL -- However, the chemical examiner at the FSL after making examinations of the stuff inside the sealed cloth parcels, omits to mention in the report Ex.PW-1/J, about his re-enclosing the examined stuff inside the cloth parcels and affix the seals of the FSL – It was required to be mandatorily done -- Primary evidence for proving the charge drawn against the accused come under a cloud of deep suspicion -- Charge drawn against the accused did not come to be cogently established – Appeal allowed, judgment of conviction and sentence set aside, appellant acquitted of the charge.

(Para 13-19)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 15, 20, 27A, 29 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Regular bail – Recovery of 10 quintals, 37 Kgs of poppy husk and 34 Kgs of Ganja from co-accused -- Petitioner in custody for the last 10 months and 17 days, although he was involved in one more case, i.e. under Section 174-A IPC, in which he has already been sentenced for the period already undergone by him – Having regard to the fact that no recovery was effected from the petitioner and his name emerged on the basis of disclosure statement only, petitioner admitted to bail and ordered to be released on bail.

(Para 4, 5)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 20, 37 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- NDPS case – Commercial quantity -- Regular  bail – Fair trial – Recovery of 2Kg 45 grams of ‘Cannabis’ -- Constitutional guarantee of expeditious trial cannot be diluted by applying the rigors of Section 37 of the ND&PS Act in perpetuity -- Petitioner is in custody since 18.12.2021 and the facts suggest that the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future -- Nothing on record to suggest that delay in trial is attributable to the petitioner -- Bail petition allowed and petitioner is ordered to be released on bail.

(Para 2, 8, 17, 18)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 20, 25, 36A(4) – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 167(2), 173 – NDPS Case -- Statutory/ Default bail  -- Accused gets an indefeasible right to the grant of bail on account of the default by the Investigating Agency in not presenting the report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. within the stipulated period -- Application for extension to file report u/s 173 Cr.P.C. was allowed and an extension of 90 days was granted, however in the revision said order set aside – Held, once High Court has held that the grant of extension of 90 days in presentation of the challan itself is bad in the eyes of law, the further detention of the petitioners would be in violation of Section 167(2) Cr.P.C. read with Section 36A (4) of the NDPS Act -- Petitioner ordered to be released on bail.

(Para 11, 12)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 20(b)(ii)(C) -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – NDPS case – Regular bail -- Fact that the co-accused who was released on bail has not surrendered cannot be a germane factor to decline bail to the co-accused/ appellant.

(Para 8)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Sections 22, 61, 85, 37 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- NDPS case – Commercial quantity – Regular bail -- 500 bottles of Siorex Syrup recovered from rear set of car -- Petitioner in custody from the last 02 years -- None of the 14 prosecution witnesses have been examined so far -- Petitioner is also a first-time offender with no other case registered against him under the NDPS Act -- In such a situation, the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted to an extent in view of the salutary provisions of Article 21 of the Constitution of India which provides for the right to a speedy trial and the petitioner can be granted the concession of bail – Bail allowed.

(Para 1, 2, 7-10)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22 -- NDPS case – Non-deposit of case property in judicial malkhana – Acquittal -- Case property produced before the Magistrate, direction given to deposit in Judicial Malkhana but it was never deposited, it remained in the Police Station -- Non-deposit in the judicial malkhana was sought to be explained by stating that there was no space – No statement of Incharge of judicial malkhana ever recorded -- No application was presented before the Magistrate to modify the direction – Accordingly, the appeal is allowed and the judgment of conviction and order of sentence set aside -- Appellant acquitted.

(Para 30-36)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21, 50 -- NDPS Case – Acquittal – Non-compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act – It is not the case of the prosecution that polythene from which the police party recovered the contraband was already thrown away by the appellant but it was in the hand of the appellant -- Thus, compliance of Section 50 of NDPS Act is imperative in nature, which had not been made – Recovery of 10 grams heroin, which is non-commercial quantity -- Nothing on record to show that the appellant has any criminal antecedents -- Police party did not join any independent witness -- Held, prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond the reasonable doubt as the compliance of provisions of Section 50 of NDPS Act has not been made in this case -- Appeal allowed -- Impugned order convicting and sentencing the appellant set aside and the appellant is acquitted.

(Para 9, 10)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 20, 29, 37 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- NDPS case – Commercial quantity – Regular bail -- Can the provision of Section 37 of the Act, be construed to have same efficacy throughout the pendency of trial, notwithstanding, the period of custody of the accused -- Held, the Constitutional guarantee of expeditious trial cannot be diluted by applying the rigors of Section 37 of ND&Ps Act in perpetuity -- Petitioner is in custody since 24.02.2021 and the facts suggest that the trial is not likely to be concluded in near future -- Co-accused has already been released on bail – Bail petition allowed.

(Para 7-18)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 2(iii)(b) -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Ganja seeds for plantation – Regular  bail -- Petitioner in custody since 20.05.2022 – Materials on record show that the petitioner has supplied Ganja seed for cultivation -- As per the definition of Ganja in Section 2(iii)(b) of the NDPS Act, 1985, it is not a banned contraband -- No specific allegation that the Ganja seeds were supplied by the petitioner to the other person with an intention to receive back the grown Ganja after cultivation – Charge-sheet already filed -- Petitioner ordered to be released on bail.

(Para 5)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22(C) – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- NDPS case – Regular bail – Commercial quantity – Petitioner in custody since 22.01.2021 and none of the 15 PWs have been examined till date -- Therefore, the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted in view of Article 21 of the Constitution of India which provides for a right to speedy Trial and the petitioner can be granted the concession of bail – Petitioner ordered to be released on bail.

(Para 7, 8)

A. Border Security Force Act, 1968 (47 of 1968), Section 40, 46 -- Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985)-- Section 9, 25 – NDPS case – BSF Commandant – Acquittal -- Conviction by General Security Force Court --  Appellant was commanding the Force operating over a large area, including from where the Jerrycans (controlled substance under NDPS Act ) allegedly moved from the Indian side to the Pakistani side -- Actual manning of the area is by the subordinate personnel of the Force -- Subordinate personnel have been adjudged guilty, indicating their active involvement -- No direct evidence against the appellant – Held, appellant, being the Commandant, had no responsibility/ duty to prevent such incident -- ceteris paribus, without other material(s) incriminating the appellant or pointing to his guilt, the statement of a single person alone, ought not to have, in this instance, resulted in his conviction -- Impugned Judgment quashed, conviction and sentence set aside -- Appellant held entitled to full retiral benefits from the date of his superannuation till date.

(Para 38-51)

B. Uniform pattern of judgments -- Supreme Court held, it is desirable that all Courts and Tribunals, as a matter of practice, number paragraphs in all Orders and Judgments in seriatim -- Secretary-General shall circulate this judgement to the learned Registrars General of all High Courts, to place the same before Hon’ble the Chief Justices, to consider adoption of a uniform format for Judgments and Orders, including paragraphing -- The learned Chief Justices may direct the Courts and Tribunals subordinate to their High Courts accordingly as well.

(Para 56, 57)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 18, 21C, 22C, 29, 36A(4) – NDPS case – Default bail – Commercial quantity -- Challan without FSL report -- No application or report was filed by the Public Prosecutor as per the requirement of Section 36A(4) of NDPS Act within prescribed statutory period of 180 days – Report of FSL still awaited -- Report of the FSL goes to the root of the case and is a material document, challan without the same is not to be treated as complete challan – Order rejecting default bail to the petitioner set aside and he is ordered to be released on default bail.

(Para 6-10)

A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 37 -- NDPS case – Commercial quantity – Regular bail – Only manner in which such special conditions as enacted u/s 37 can be considered within constitutional parameters is where the court is reasonably satisfied on a prima facie look at the material on record (whenever the bail application is made) that the accused is not guilty -- Any other interpretation, would result in complete denial of the bail to a person accused of offences such as those enacted u/s 37 of the NDPS Act.

(Para 19)

B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 20, 25, 29, 37 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- NDPS case – Commercial quantity – Regular bail – Laws which impose stringent conditions for grant of bail, may be necessary in public interest; yet, if trials are not concluded in time, the injustice wrecked on the individual is immeasurable – Jails are overcrowded and their living conditions, more often than not, appalling – Incarceration has further deleterious effects, where the accused belongs to the weakest economic strata: immediate loss of livelihood, and in several cases, scattering of families as well as loss of family bonds and alienation from society -- The courts therefore, have to be sensitive to these aspects (because in the event of an acquittal, the loss to the accused is irreparable), and ensure that trials, especially in cases, where special laws enact stringent provisions, are taken up and concluded speedily -- Appellant directed to be enlarged on bail.

(Para 21-23)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22, 37 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Commercial quantity -- Regular bail – Co-accused apprehended and commercial quantity of intoxicant tablets (Tramadol) recovered from him – Petitioner was not apprehended from the spot and was named in the disclosure statement -- As to whether the petitioner was involved or not shall be determined during the trial -- He is in custody for the last more than 08 months and not involved in any other case -- Trial will take a sufficiently long time -- Regular bail allowed.

(Para 2-6)

A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22, 50 – NDPS -- Recovery from under the seat of the motorcycle and the car -- Therefore, as no recovery was effected from the person of the appellant, Section 50 of the NDPS Act has no applicability.

(Para 11)

B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22 – NDPS – Independent witness -- Merely because no independent witness was examined would not affect the case of the prosecution in the absence of any enmity between the appellant/ accused and the police officials -- Investigating Officer of the case deposed that he had asked public persons to join the investigation but they refused to do so -- Appeal against conviction dismissed.

(Para 11, 12)

A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 15, 42 – NDPS case – Acquittal – Non-compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act -- Secret information was not reduced into writing -- Consequently, there was no question of sending the secret information to the police station or higher police officers -- Thus, there was breach of mandatory provision of Section 42 of the Act and the learned Trial Court has wrongly convicted the appellant -- Appellant is liable to be acquitted.

(Para 12-14)

B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 42 – NDPS case – Secret information – Ruqa -- Sending of ruqa for recording of the FIR in the police station can never be termed as sufficient compliance of Section 42 of the Act.

(Para 13)

C. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 42 – NDPS case – Secret information – Information to higher police officers -- As per the mandate of Section 42 of the Act, when there is total and definite non-compliance of such statutory provisions, the question of prejudice looses its significance -- It will per se amount to prejudice.

(Para 13)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 36-A, 15, 61, 85 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 167(2), 173 -- NDPS case – Challan without FSL report -- Default bail -- Case under the NDPS Act cannot be established without firstly and most importantly identifying the contraband -- Therefore no Court can possibly take cognizance of an offence under the NDPS Act without an FSL report -- Petition allowed, petitioner ordered to be released on bail.

(Para 17,18)

Punjab Good Conduct Prisoners’ (Temporary Release) Act, 1962 (11 of 1962), Section 2(aa), 3(1)(a) – Constitution of India, Article 226 -- NDPS case -- Parole to attend marriage of daughter – Petitioner is a convict, granted the concession of parole but misused the same and another case under the NDPS Act registered against him -- Conduct of the petitioner does not entitle him to the relief -- His presence in the marriage ceremonies (18/19.02.2023) would be essential being the father -- Petitioner permitted to take part in the marriage ceremonies in custody from 09.00 AM to 07.00 PM on 17.02.2023, 18.02.2023, 19.02.2023 and 20.02.2023 at his expenses.

(Para 8-11)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Sections 8, 18, 67 – Constitution of India, Article 136 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 389 -- NDPS case – Suspension of sentence -- R.I. for ten years with fine – Appellant 62 years of aged has undergone five years and six months of custody – Contention that statements u/s 67 of Act, 1985 could not be relied upon in view of the judgment in Tofan Singh’s case 2021) 4 SCC 1 = (2020) Law Today Live Doc. Id. 15591-- Appeal is likely to take some time for final hearing and the appellant has undergone over half the term of imprisonment, the appellant ordered to be released on bail.

(Para 4-6)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 18-C, 29, 37 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Constitution of India, Article 21 -- NDPS case – Commercial Quantity -- Regular bail – Petitioner in custody for the last 1 year, 6 months and 3 days; he is a first offender; though charges were framed on 03.01.2022 but only 2 out of 15 prosecution witnesses have yet been examined, the trial is likely to take a considerable time, further incarceration of the petitioner would be violative of his right enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be diluted bearing in mind the right to a speedy trial, thus the present petition for grant of regular bail deserves to be allowed -- Petition allowed.

(Para 6, 7)

A. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 67 – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (1 of 1872), Section 27, 30 -- NDPS case  -- Statement of co-accused -- Statement of co-accused is an inadmissible piece of evidence and similarly statement of accused-respondent recorded u/s 67 of the NDPS Act, cannot be used as a confessional statement.

(Para 13)

B. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 29 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 378(3) – NDPS case -- Acquittal of accused – Appeal -- Call Detail Record only established conversation between all accused -- Nature of the conversation cannot be ascertained -- So from the Call Detail Record, it is not proved that accused-respondent had delivered contraband to the other co-accused for transporting -- Similarly just from, the tower location of the accused/respondent at Ratlam in M.P. it is not proved that he had delivered poppy husk in question to the co-accused for transporting the same at Chandigarh -- No evidence on record that when and by whom the poppy husk was purchased -- As offence under NDPS Act is punishable with severe punishment so the strict burden is casted upon the prosecution to prove its case beyond the reasonable doubt -- When there is no substantive evidence on record to connect accused-respondent with the offence then he has been rightly acquitted by the trial Court – Leave to appeal declined.

(Para 14-16)

Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Intermediate quantity – Regular bail – Petitioner’ name not mentioned in the FIR which pertained to the recovery of 18.96 grams of mephedrone (value of Rs. 1.89 lakhs) from the co-accused -- During investigation, he was named as an accused based upon the statement of the co-accused and arrested – Petitioner in custody for eight months -- Petitioner deserves to be enlarged on bail and directed to be released on bail.

(Para 1-3)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 15, 42, 43 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 374 -- NDPS case – Appeal against conviction -- Acquittal of accused – Non-compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act -- Secret information not reduced into writing and not sent to the police station or higher authority -- Evidence clearly shows that the vehicle was not a public conveyance -- Explanation appended to Section 43 of the Act clearly shows that a private vehicle would not come within the expression ‘public place’ -- Held, it was mandatory to comply with the provisions of Section 42 of the Act; there was complete non-compliance of the said requirement of law -- Appeal allowed, impugned judgment and order of sentence set aside.

(Para 12)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 15 (Section 29 added later on) – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – NDPS case – Regular bail -- Recovery of 75 kgs of poppy husk from main accused -- Petitioner roped in on the basis of disclosure statement -- Petitioner is behind the bars for the last 2 months and 3 days – Conclusion of trial will take sufficient time -- No recovery was effected from the possession and the petitioner is not involved in any other case -- Petitioner ordered to release on regular bail.

(Para 1-5)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 18, 29 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Sections 167(2), 439, 401 -- NDPS case  -- Recovery of 42 kgs. and 530 grams of opium – Regular bail -- Revision against dismissal of application for default bail – Challan without FSL -- Without commenting anything on the merits and without referring to the fact that whether the petitioner is entitled to default bail under Section 167 (2) Cr.P.C. or not, considering the facts that the petitioner is not involved in any other case; he is in judicial custody for the last more than 01 year and conclusion of trial is likely to take some time as even charges have not been framed so far, the petition disposed of and the petitioner ordered to be released on regular bail.

(Para 1-6)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 62 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 451 -- NDPS case -- Superdari to purchaser of vehicle – Vehicle lying unattended in the police custody since 06.08.2019 -- Its condition would certainly deteriorate day-by-day and in turn it would be reduced to junk in case the same is not handed over to the petitioner on the imposition of suitable conditions -- Registered owner of the vehicle has no objection if the vehicle is released on superdari to the petitioner – Petition allowed and the vehicle in question ordered to be released to the petitioner on superdari.

(Para 3, 4, 8, 9)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22, 25, 37 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Regular bail – Commercial quantity – Rigour of Section 37 of NDPS Act -- Recovery of 1060 tablets of Tramadol -- Charges framed on 18.02.2022 -- Prosecution witnesses summoned not only by way of bailable and non-bailable warrants but also by way of arrest warrants of the prosecution witnesses, who are the official/ police officials -- Delay in prosecution witnesses, resulted petitioner to face incarceration for about 1½ years – Adverse inference drawn against the prosecution, Court prima facie believed that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence and so far as the second ingredient for making a departure from the bar contained under Section 37 of the NDPS Act is concerned, the petitioner is stated to be not involved in any other case – Not the case of the State that in case the petitioner is released on bail, then he may repeat the offence or he may abscond from justice or influence any witness -- Petition allowed, petitioner ordered to be released on regular bail.

(Para 11-13)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 22 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 411 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 278(3) -- NDPS case – Acquittal of accused by Trial Court -- Leave to appeal -- Prosecution case that recovery of the contraband from the stolen scooter being driven by the respondent – Scooter was stolen on 26.08.2012 whereas the alleged recovery was made on 30.10.2012 i.e. after a period of 2 months.

-- It is highly improbable that a person would not record DDR or FIR if his vehicle is lost -- Very basis of prosecution case that the scooter from which contraband was recovered not proved with cogent evidence -- This fact is a material fact, however the evidence of the prosecution on this material fact is doubtful and shaky

-- Representative sample drawn by the Judicial Magistrate was not sent for chemical examination -- No explanation given by the IO as to why the representative sample was not sent for chemical examination

-- Form No. 29 stated to be prepared at the spot by ASI bears the signatures of the officiating SHO, when he has not stated that he was present at the spot -- He categorically stated case property as well as the accused were produced before him in the police station.

Held, it is the cardinal principal of criminal jurisprudence that the prosecution has to prove its case beyond shadow of doubts – Opinion expressed by the trial court is not only a possible view, but also it is fair and reasonable and cannot be termed as perverse in any manner, thus, it does not warrant interference – There is always presumption of innocence and in case of acquittal, there is double presumption -- Leave to appeal as well as appeal dismissed.

(Para 8-16)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 36-A -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 167(2), 173 -- NDPS case – Challan without FSL report -- Default bail -- SHO moved an application before the expiry of period of 180 days and the learned Addl. Sessions Judge on the same date sought report from the learned P.P. and on the same date allowed the application for grant of extension of time for a further period of two months but without giving any notice to the petitioner in this regard -- Condition of giving notice to the accused has to be satisfied as observed in Sanjay Kumar Kedia’s case 2009 (17) SCC 631 -- Ld. Addl. Sessions Judge while dismissing the application for grant of default bail although referred to the judgment in Sanjay Kumar Kedia’s case has not followed the judgment in true perspective -- Revision petition allowed, the petitioner ordered to be released on default bail u/s 167(2) of the Cr.P.C.

(Para 7-10)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 15, 29 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 438 -- NDPS case – Anticipatory bail -- Disclosure statement -- Recovery of 1.700 kilograms of Chura Doda Post from co-acused – Petitioner named in disclosure statement -- It is a settled principle of law that anticipatory bail cannot be granted to an accused who has been named in the disclosure statement of the arrested accused -- No merit, petition dismissed.

(Para 6-10)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 21, 37, 61, 85 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 -- NDPS case – Commercial quantity – Rigour of Section 37 of NDPS Act -- Regular bail -- Recovery of 500 grams of heroin – Charges framed on 28.09.2021, about 18 adjournments granted but no prosecution witness examined except one formal witness – Prosecution witnesses are the official witnesses -- Petitioner in incarceration for about 2 years, 1 month and 24 days – Argument that petitioner is falsely implicated get substantiated from the fact that for 18 times no prosecution witness came forward for deposition -- Petitioner is not involved in any other case under the NDPS Act – Not argued that in case the petitioner is released on bail, then he may repeat the offence or may abscond from justice -- Both the conditions for making a departure from the bar contained u/s 37 of the NDPS Act satisfied – Court deemed it fit and proper to grant the regular bail to the petitioner -- Petition allowed.

(Para 2-6)

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Sections 21, 29 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – NDPS case -- Second regular bail application – Recovery of 1 kg 530 grams of heroin – Hon’ble Apex Court passed orders and has observed in others cases that long custody of the accused can be considered for grant of regular bail even in case of commercial quantity, leaving the question (whether recovery of contraband is of commercial quantity or otherwise) as the same is to be considered by the trial Court at the relevant stage on the basis of material to be adduced by the prosecution -- Taking into consideration the custody of the petitioner since 14.10.2019, stage of the trial and without adverting to the merits of the case, Court deemed it appropriate to enlarge the petitioner on regular bail.

(Para 1-6)

Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (49 of 1988), Section 19, 21(b), 27, 29, 59(2) – Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (61 of 1985), Section 7, 13 -- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (45 of 1860), Section 341, 394 -- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), Section 439 – Bribe for nor registering case -- Regular bail -- Accused proclaiming themselves to be Incharge of STF Punjab police, recovered 5 grams of Heroin from one Bhullar, kept the contraband and accepted the bribe of Rs.19,000/- for not registering the case – Considering that co-accused were granted bail by the Court, the petitioner is in custody since 7.7.2022, conclusion of trial is likely to take time, sanction to prosecute has not been received, the petitioner being a police official prima-facie there is no chance of his absconding, bail granted to the petitioner.

(Para 6)