"Party Autonomy is the Backbone of Arbitration: Bombay High Court Upholds Sole Arbitrator Appointment Despite Party’s Attempts to Frustrate Arbitration Proceedings    |     Reasonable Doubt Arising from Sole Testimony in Absence of Corroboration, Power Cut Compounded Identification Difficulties: Supreme Court Acquits Appellants in Murder Case    |     ED Can Investigate Without FIRs: PH High Court Affirms PMLA’s Broad Powers    |     Accident Claim | Contributory Negligence Cannot Be Vicariously Attributed to Passengers: Supreme Court    |     Default Bail | Indefeasible Right to Bail Prevails: Allahabad High Court Faults Special Judge for Delayed Extension of Investigation    |     “Habitual Offenders Cannot Satisfy Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act”: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Bail to Accused with Extensive Criminal Record    |     Delhi High Court Denies Substitution for Son Due to 'Gross Unexplained Delay' of Over Six Years in Trademark Suit    |     Section 4B of the Tenancy Act Cannot Override Land Exemptions for Public Development: Bombay High Court    |     Suspicion, However High, Is Not a Substitute for Proof: Calcutta High Court Orders Reinstatement of Coast Guard Officer Dismissed on Suspicion of Forgery    |     Age Not Conclusively Proven, Prosecutrix Found to be a Consenting Party: Chhattisgarh High Court Acquits Accused in POCSO Case    |     'Company's Absence in Prosecution Renders Case Void': Himachal High Court Quashes Complaint Against Pharma Directors    |     Preventive Detention Cannot Sacrifice Personal Liberty on Mere Allegations: J&K High Court Quashes Preventive Detention of Local Journalist    |     J.J. Act | Accused's Age at Offense Critical - Juvenility Must Be Addressed: Kerala High Court Directs Special Court to Reframe Charges in POCSO Case    |     Foreign Laws Must Be Proved Like Facts: Delhi HC Grants Bail in Cryptocurrency Money Laundering Case    |    

"Prolonged Incarceration Must Override Statutory Bar Under NDPS Act," Rules Punjab & Haryana High Court

24 August 2024 3:06 PM

By: sayum


Punjab & Haryana High Court has granted regular bail to Gurinder Singh, accused under the NDPS Act, after noting the extensive period of custody he has already undergone and the sluggish pace of his trial. The decision, delivered by Justice Kirti Singh, highlights the importance of balancing statutory restrictions with the constitutional rights of the accused, particularly in cases where trial delays lead to prolonged incarceration.

The case against Gurinder Singh arose from an FIR registered on January 19, 2022, based on secret information alleging his involvement in the smuggling and transportation of poppy husk. The police reportedly recovered 75 kgs of poppy husk from Gurinder Singh and his father, Bhola Singh, during a vehicle check. Both were arrested at the scene. The petitioner has been in custody since his arrest and has faced charges under Sections 15, 29, 61, and 85 of the NDPS Act.

Justice Kirti Singh noted that Gurinder Singh had been in custody for over 19 months, with the trial showing little progress. Charges were framed almost two years ago, on September 29, 2022, yet only three out of 17 prosecution witnesses had been examined. The court expressed concern over the protracted trial, which was likely to continue for a significant period.

In her decision, Justice Singh referenced several Supreme Court rulings that addressed the issue of prolonged incarceration under the NDPS Act. Notably, she cited the Supreme Court’s decision in Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha, where it was held that prolonged incarceration could override the statutory embargo of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which typically restricts the granting of bail in such cases.

The court acknowledged the serious nature of the charges but emphasized that the right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution. The court also took into account that Gurinder Singh had no prior criminal record and that the trial's delay was not attributable to any actions on his part. The balance, therefore, tilted in favor of granting bail, as continued detention would constitute an excessive infringement on his personal liberty.

Justice Kirti Singh, echoing the principles laid down in earlier Supreme Court rulings, stated, "The prolonged incarceration generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act."

The High Court’s decision to grant bail to Gurinder Singh underscores the judiciary's role in safeguarding individual liberties, even in cases involving severe allegations under stringent laws like the NDPS Act. The ruling reflects the court's commitment to ensuring that statutory provisions do not eclipse the fundamental rights enshrined in the Constitution, particularly the right to a speedy trial. This judgment could influence future cases, encouraging a more nuanced approach to bail applications in the context of delayed trials.

Date of Decision: August 20, 2024

Gurinder Singh v. State of Punjab

Similar News