Order XLI Rule 23A CPC | Re-Trial Necessary When Crucial Parties Impleaded In Appeal: Telangana High Court Cannot Freeze Entire Bank Account For Small Disputed Sums: Rajasthan High Court Issues Comprehensive Guidelines Against Indiscriminate Account Freezes In Cyber Crime Probes 187(3) BNSS | No Extension Of Investigation Time Without Notice To Accused: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Default Bail In NDPS Case Road Widening Under Master Plan Cannot Be Stalled For Formal Land Acquisition, Section 305 Permits Direct Removal Of Encroachments: Madhya Pradesh High Court P&H High Court Quashes Preventive Detention Over 45-Day Delay In Informing Detenu Of Right To Represent 'Sole Allegation Of Torture Cannot Stand Alone': Andhra Pradesh High Court Acquits Husband Under Section 498A IPC After Dowry Demand Disproved Seeking Corroboration To Victim's Testimony Amounts To Adding Insult To Injury: Bombay High Court Upholds Rape Conviction Offences Of Cheating & Criminal Breach Of Trust Cannot Coexist On Same Facts: Calcutta High Court Quashes FIR Over Commercial Contract Dispute "Accident Alone Is Not Proof": Delhi High Court Acquits Bus Driver In 2003 Road Fatality Case, Rules Mere Speeding Or Collision Insufficient For Section 304A IPC Mandate Of Regulations Must Be Read Into Public Notices: Kerala High Court Reverses Order Directing NMC To Reopen Portal For Medical College's PG Seat Hike Unproven 1946 Oral Sale And Subsequent School Gift Cannot Convey Valid Title Over Tribal Land: Orissa High Court Orders Compensation After 80 Years ED Can Probe Money Laundering In J&K Corruption Cases: J&K High Court Rules S. 5(1)(d) J&K PC Act Corresponds To Amended S. 7 Of Central PC Act Not Mere Lip Service: Supreme Court Quashes GST Notice Under Section 74 Lacking Foundational Facts Of Fraud Or Suppression Selling Manufactured Goods At Factory Premises Doesn't Turn 'Industrial' Land Into 'Commercial' For Stamp Duty: Supreme Court Supreme Court Orders All States To Form Dedicated SITs To Probe Fake Motor Accident Claims, Warns Insurance Top Brass Against Selective Referrals Port Trusts Not Immune From Customs Duty On Pilfered Goods: Supreme Court Upholds Notification Declaring Mumbai Port Trust As Custodian Under Section 45

Supreme Court Grants Bail, Upholds Fundamental Right to Liberty in NDPS Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India granted bail to Rabi Prakash in a Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) case, emphasizing the importance of upholding the fundamental right to liberty. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surya Kant and Hon’ble Mr. Justice Dipankar Datta, highlighted the adverse impact of prolonged incarceration on an individual’s constitutional rights.

The case involved P.S. Case No. 91 of 2019, where Rabi Prakash was arrested on charges of violating Section 20(b)(ii)(C) of the NDPS Act. After spending over three and a half years in custody, the petitioner sought bail, as the trial was still ongoing with only one out of 19 witnesses examined.

In their order, the Justices noted, “The prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution and in such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act.” The court acknowledged the significance of safeguarding individual liberties and recognized that the formation of an opinion on guilt should not be hastily made, considering the petitioner’s extended period of imprisonment.

While granting bail, the court imposed stringent conditions due to the petitioner not being a resident of Odisha, where the case was registered. The petitioner was directed to produce two local sureties and appear before the Trial Court on every hearing date. The court warned that any absence would be treated as a misuse of the bail granted.

This judgment reinforces the principle that the right to personal liberty is fundamental and should be protected, even in cases involving serious offenses. The Supreme Court’s decision reflects the delicate balance between individual rights and statutory provisions, demonstrating a commitment to ensuring justice while upholding constitutional guarantees.

The ruling is a significant development in the jurisprudence surrounding bail in NDPS cases and provides guidance for future matters where prolonged incarceration and the preservation of fundamental rights are at stake.

Supreme court emphasized, “The prolonged incarceration, generally militates against the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution,” underscoring the importance of protecting individual liberties.

This decision serves as a reminder of the judiciary’s duty to safeguard fundamental rights, even in cases where the statutory framework may restrict them. The court’s careful consideration of the petitioner’s prolonged custody and the necessity of conditional liberty sets a vital precedent for balancing the scales of justice.

Date of Decision: 13th July 2023

RABI PRAKASH  vs THE STATE OF ODISHA    

Latest Legal News