MACT | A Minor Cannot Be Treated as a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Consensual Love Affair Not Cheating Under IPC Section 417: Madras High Court Acquits Man Despite Paternity Confirmation Review Jurisdiction is an Ant-Hole in a Pigeon-Hol: Madras High Court Dismisses Review Plea Against Order Upholding Arbitral Award on Liquidated Damages Bank Can Freeze Guarantor’s Salary Account to Recover Loan Dues: Kerala High Court Clarifies CPC Exemption Does Not Apply to Banker’s Right Revenue Entry Calling Property ‘Ancestral’ Does Not Create Title: Gujarat High Court Upholds Registered Will in Second Appeal Licensee Cannot Resist Resumption Of Railway Land: Gauhati High Court Upholds Eviction For Amrit Bharat Station Scheme Mere Non-Payment of Business Dues Is Not Cheating: Calcutta High Court Protects Traders from Criminal Prosecution in Purely Civil Dispute Prosecution’s Failure to Prove Age of Prosecutrix Beyond Reasonable Doubt Fatal to POCSO Conviction: Rajasthan High Court No Title, No Right, No Equity: Bombay High Court Demolishes Claim Over Footpath Stall, Imposes ₹5 Lakh Costs for Abuse of Process Section 155(2) Cr.P.C. Does Not Bar Complainant From Seeking Magistrate’s Permission: Allahabad High Court Clarifies Law on Non-Cognizable Investigations Un-Retracted Section 108 Statement Is Binding: Delhi High Court Declines to Reopen ₹3.5 Crore Cigarette Smuggling Valuation Section 34 Is Not an Appeal in Disguise: Delhi High Court Upholds 484-Day Extension in IRCON–Afcons Tunnel Arbitration Section 432(2) Cannot Be Rendered Fatuous: Calcutta High Court Reasserts Balance Between Judicial Opinion and Executive Discretion in Remission Matters Termination of Mandate Is Not Termination of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Revives Reference and Appoints Substitute Arbitrator CBI Can’t Prosecute When Bank Suffers No Loss: Andhra Pradesh High Court Discharges Bhimavaram Hospitals Directors in ₹1.5 Crore SBI Case Section 256 CrPC Cannot Be A Shield For An Accused Who Never Faced Trial: Allahabad High Court Restores 8 Cheque Bounce Complaints

Prolonged Incarceration Must Be Considered Dehors Bar of Section 37 NDPS Act – Punjab and Haryana High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a landmark judgment today, the Punjab and Haryana High Court underscored the significance of personal liberty and the consideration of prolonged incarceration in bail applications under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act). Hon'ble Mr. Justice Pankaj Jain, while delivering the verdict in the case of Shivam Kumar versus the State of Punjab, emphasized that "the prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution."

The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, Shivam Kumar, in case FIR No. 325, registered under Section 22(c) of the NDPS Act, who had been in custody for nearly three years. In a detailed judgment, Justice Jain noted the need to consider the prolonged duration of incarceration as a significant factor, irrespective of the statutory bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Advocates Mr. Tanvir Joshi, representing the petitioner, and Mr. Jashandeep Singh, AAG, Punjab, presented their arguments, with the court ultimately siding with the petitioner's plea for bail.

The decision aligns with several precedents set by the Supreme Court of India, which were duly referenced in the judgment. Notably, cases like Rabi Prakash Vs. The State of Odisha, Mohammad Salman Hanif Shaikh Vs. The State of Gujarat, and others were cited, all highlighting the judiciary's stance on personal liberty and the impact of extended periods of imprisonment on the accused.

This judgment is seen as a significant move towards upholding the rights of undertrials, particularly in cases governed by stringent laws like the NDPS Act. The court's observation about the "conditional liberty" overriding statutory embargoes underlines the judiciary's growing concern over undertrials facing prolonged incarceration without trial.

Legal experts view this judgment as a reaffirmation of the constitutional right to life and personal liberty, especially in the context of bail under the NDPS Act. The court's decision sets a precedent for future cases, ensuring that the duration of custody remains a pivotal factor in the judicial process.

Date of Decision: 15 November 2023

Shivam Kumar VS State of Punjab 

Latest Legal News