Non-Compliance with Statutory Provisions Cannot Be Overlooked: Allahabad High Court in Granting Bail to Ganja Trafficking Accused

Bail granted due to prolonged incarceration, trial delays, and procedural lapses under NDPS Act and Cr.P.C.

The Allahabad High Court has granted bail to Manjeet Singh and Laxmi Narayan Thakur, accused in a significant drug trafficking case involving the transportation of 221 kg of Ganja. The decision, delivered by Justice Krishan Pahal, emphasizes the prolonged pre-trial detention of the accused and procedural non-compliance by the investigating authorities, highlighting key legal precedents and statutory requirements under the NDPS Act and the Constitution of India.

The prosecution alleged that on August 24, 2019, a truck bearing registration number MP 09 HG 4594 was intercepted near Sutrahi Crossing, SH 34, Mau, based on intelligence received by the NCB. The truck, driven by Manjeet Singh with Laxmi Narayan Thakur as the co-driver, was found to be carrying 221 kg of Ganja concealed in the cabin. The contraband was reportedly sent by Junail Bhairakunda from Assam and was to be delivered to Awadhesh Yadav in Mau. The accused were apprehended, and the contraband was seized, but the prosecution faced challenges in complying with mandatory statutory provisions during the seizure process.

Procedural Compliance: The court underscored the critical importance of adherence to statutory procedures under the NDPS Act, specifically Sections 42, 50, and 52-A, which mandate proper protocol during the seizure and sampling of narcotic substances. Justice Pahal remarked, “Non-compliance with the statutory provisions cannot be overlooked, especially in cases involving severe allegations under the NDPS Act.”

Independent Witnesses: The court noted the failure to involve independent public witnesses during the seizure process, as required by Section 100 of the Cr.P.C. “The absence of independent witnesses raises substantial doubts about the integrity of the investigation,” the judgment stated, emphasizing that only home-guards were present as witnesses during the seizure.

Prolonged Incarceration: Highlighting the delay in trial proceedings, Justice Pahal referred to the Supreme Court’s stance on the right to a speedy trial as part of the fundamental rights guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. “The applicants have been in custody for over four years and eight months with minimal progress in the trial, constituting a violation of their fundamental rights,” the judgment read.

The judgment extensively discussed the necessity of timely trials in cases involving stringent laws like the NDPS Act. It reiterated that prolonged pre-trial detention without substantive progress in the case undermines the accused's right to liberty. Justice Pahal cited several Supreme Court judgments, including Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi), to reinforce the principle that undue delay in trials justifies granting bail.

Justice Pahal emphasized, “The failure to follow due process in seizure and sampling, coupled with the prolonged pre-trial detention, mandates the granting of bail. The accused’s fundamental rights under Article 21 cannot be sacrificed at the altar of procedural lapses.”

The Allahabad High Court’s decision to grant bail in this high-profile drug trafficking case underscores the judiciary’s commitment to uphold procedural integrity and the fundamental rights of the accused. By addressing the procedural lapses and prolonged incarceration, this judgment sets a significant precedent for future cases under the NDPS Act, reinforcing the necessity of a balanced approach between stringent law enforcement and the protection of individual liberties.

Date of Decision: 16th May 2024

Manjeet Singh and Another v. Union of India Through Intelligence Officer N.C.B. Lucknow