Section 164 CrPC Statement Recorded Without Procedural Safeguards Or 'Cooling-Off' Period Not A Valid Confession: Jharkhand High Court Anticipatory Bail Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Investigation Is At A Nascent Stage If Custodial Interrogation Is Not Indispensable: Telangana High Court Actual Pay Drawn During Last 10 Months Must Be Basis For Pension Calculation, Regardless Of Notional Pay In Parent Bank: Punjab & Haryana High Court Limitation For Redemption Of Usufructuary Mortgage Starts Only When Mortgage Money Is Paid Or Tendered: Allahabad High Court Exclusion Of Natural Heir From Will Not A Suspicious Circumstance If Execution Is Duly Proved: Punjab & Haryana High Court Right To Travel Abroad Is A Basic Human Right; Permission Cannot Be Denied Merely Because Visit Is For 'Social Or Celebratory' Purpose: Andhra Pradesh High Court Citizen Cannot Be Externed Merely For Raising Grievances Against Government Decisions: Bombay High Court Lack Of Opportunity To Cross-Examine Partition Commissioner Does Not Vitiate Final Decree; Report Is Part Of Record: Calcutta High Court Section 27 Evidence Act Recoveries Inadmissible If Police Had Prior Knowledge Of Location Before Recording Disclosure: Delhi High Court Foreigners Act | Burden Of Proof To Establish Citizenship Solely On Proceedee, Never Shifts; Prescription For Parkinson's No Proof Of Mental Illness To Explain Testimony Contradictions: Gauhati High Court Trial Court Erred In Abating Suit While Application To Bring Legal Heirs On Record Was Pending: Gujarat High Court Places Of Worship Act 1991 Not A Shield Against Land Acquisition By State For Public Purpose: Allahabad High Court Unregistered Partition Deed Creating New Rights In Immovable Property Inadmissible In Evidence: Himachal Pradesh High Court Illiteracy No Excuse For Filing False Income Tax Returns, Court Must Presume Culpable Mental State Under Section 278E: Jharkhand High Court Trial Court Must Consider Convenience Of Family & Accused's Right To Assist Counsel While Deciding Jail Shifting Applications: J&K High Court Investigation Substantially Complete, Offence Carries Max 7 Years Jail: Karnataka High Court Grants Bail To Police Officers In Corruption Case Buyer's Knowledge Of Title Defect Doesn't Extinguish Statutory Warranty Of Title Unless Sale Deed Specifically Excludes It: Kerala High Court Madras High Court Sets Aside Appointment Of PAs To Judges, Says Relaxation Of Qualifications Via Circular Violates Article 14 BNSS | Mere Allegation Of Calling Deceased To Spot Not Sufficient To Deny Bail To Woman If Charge Sheet Filed: Orissa High Court Amendment To Rectify Property Description In Agreement To Sell Can Be Allowed At Any Stage Of Specific Performance Suit: Delhi High Court NDPS | Confession Before Police Cannot Be Sole Basis For Prosecution: Telangana High Court Grants Bail No Judicial Sanctity For Adulterous Relationships: J&K High Court Refuses To Quash Abduction FIR Involving Married Woman Habitual Offender Accused Of Brutal Murder Of SC Community Member Denied Bail: Kerala High Court Prosecution Fails To Prove Murder Charge As Recovery Witnesses Turn Hostile: Uttarakhand High Court Acquits Man Acquittal In Criminal Case Based On Benefit Of Doubt Does Not Automatically Absolve Employee From Disciplinary Liability: Madhya Pradesh High Court Punjab & Haryana HC Quashes FIR Against Woman For Dressing Pet Dog As Lord Krishna Personal Laws Cannot Be Used As Shield To Commit Gang Rape Under Garb Of Nikah Halala: Allahabad High Court

High Court Grants Default Bail in NDPS Case Due to Incomplete Investigation: Violation of Section 36-A(4) of NDPS Act

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab and Haryana has granted default bail to a petitioner in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act case. The court held that the investigation remained incomplete within the prescribed period, thus entitling the accused to default bail under Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).

The Hon’ble Mrs. Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul, while delivering the judgment on June 6, 2023, stated, “If on the expiry of the prescribed period of 180 days, investigation is still incomplete, an indefeasible right would accrue in favor of the accused under Section 167(2) Cr.P.C.”

The case revolved around the petitioner, Chander Prakash, who challenged the order passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sonipat. The petitioner argued that the challan had been presented without the Forensic Science Laboratory (FSL) report within the stipulated period. As a result, the statutory period for completing the investigation had expired.

The court further emphasized that in NDPS Act cases, the FSL report is crucial as it helps determine the nature of the recovered substance. The absence of the FSL report rendered the challan incomplete, and the petitioner was entitled to default bail.

Highlighting the violation of Section 36-A(4) of the NDPS Act, the court noted, “The provisions of Section 36-A(4) of the NDPS Act insofar as the requirement of a report being made by the Public Prosecutor for an extension of time is concerned, are mandatory in nature.”

The judgment underlined the importance of the report from the Public Prosecutor for seeking an extension of time, which was not fulfilled in this case. The court found that the extension of time granted by the lower court lacked a report from the Public Prosecutor, rendering it invalid.

The court ordered the petitioner’s release on bail, clarifying that the judgment did not express any opinion on the merits of the case.

This ruling reaffirms the rights of the accused and underscores the necessity for strict compliance with procedural requirements, ensuring a fair and just legal process in NDPS Act cases.

Date of decision: 6th June, 2023

Chander Prakash vs State of Haryana

Latest Legal News