Registrar Has No Power To Cancel Registered Sale Deeds: Madras High Court Reaffirms Civil Court’s Exclusive Jurisdiction MP High Court Refuses to Quash FIR Against Principal of Sacred Heart Convent High School in Forced Conversion Case Employees Of Registered Societies Cannot Claim Article 311 Protection: Delhi High Court Clarifies Limits Of Constitutional Safeguards In Private Employment Maintenance Cannot Be Doubled Without Cogent Reasons, Wife's Education And Earning Capacity Relevant Factors: Gujarat High Court A Foreign Award Must First Be "Recognised" Before It Becomes A Decree: Bombay High Court A Registered Will Does Not Become Genuine Merely Because It Is Registered: Andhra Pradesh High Court Rejects Suspicious Testament Compensation Under Railways Act Requires Proof of Bona Fide Passenger – Mere GRP Entry and Medical Records Cannot Establish ‘Untoward Incident’: Delhi High Court Tenancy Rights Cannot Be Bequeathed By Will: Himachal Pradesh High Court Declares Mutation Based On Tenant’s Will Void Preventive Detention Cannot Be Based On Mere Apprehension of Bail: Delhi High Court Quashes PITNDPS Detention Order Probate Court Alone Has Exclusive Jurisdiction To Decide Validity Of Will – Probate Petition Cannot Be Rejected Merely Because A Civil Suit Is Pending: Allahabad High Court PwD Candidates Cannot Be Denied Appointment After Selection; Authorities Must Accommodate Them In Suitable Posts: Supreme Court Directs SSC And CAG To Appoint Candidates With Disabilities When Registered Partition Deed Exists, Plea Of Prior Oral Partition Cannot Override It:  Madras High Court Dismisses Second Appeal Municipal Bodies Cannot Demand Character Verification Of Residents: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Surveillance Condition In Building Sanction State Cannot Exploit Contractual Workers For Perennial Work: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Pay Parity To PUNBUS Drivers And Conductors Police Inputs Cannot Create New Building Laws: Calcutta High Court Strikes Down Security-Based Conditions Near Nabanna 'Raising A Child As Daughter Does Not Make Her An Adopted Child': Punjab & Haryana High Court Once Leave Under Section 80(2) CPC Is Granted, Prior Notice to Government Is Not Mandatory: Orissa High Court Restores Trial Court Decree State Cannot Use Article 226 To Evade Compliance With Court Orders: Gauhati High Court Dismisses Union’s Petition With Costs ED Officers Accused Of Assault By ₹23-Crore Scam Accused – FIR Survives But Probe Shifted To CBI: Jharkhand High Court High Courts Should Not Interfere In Academic Integrity Proceedings At Preliminary Stage: Kerala High Court Power Of Attorney Holder With Personal Knowledge Can Depose In Cheque Bounce Cases: Kerala High Court Sets Aside Acquittal Agreement Cannot Dissolve Hindu Marriage, But Can Prove Mutual Separation”: J&K & Ladakh High Court Denies Maintenance

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