Lack Of Public Witnesses, Videography Of Contraband Recovery Relevant Factors For Bail In NDPS Cases: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has observed that absence of public witnesses and lack of videography or photography of contraband recovery are relevant considerations while deciding bail applications in cases under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act.Justice Prateek Jalan made the observation while granting bail to an accused booked in a case involving alleged recovery of over 22 kilograms of ganja.As per the prosecution, accused persons were allegedly apprehended carrying bags containing ganja.The prosecution alleged that 22.564 kilograms of ganja was recovered from the applicant while 5.098 kilograms was recovered from the co-accused.Seeking bail, the applicant argued that although the alleged recovery involved commercial quantity, the seizure was neither conducted in the presence of independent witnesses nor documented through photography or videography.The applicant also pointed out that he is a person with disability and had remained in custody for more than three years and three months. It was further submitted that only 9 out of 17 prosecution witnesses had been examined and the trial was likely to take considerable time to conclude.Opposing the plea, the State argued that the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act were attracted since the recovery involved commercial quantity of ganja. It was also submitted that the FSL report had confirmed the seized substance to be ganja.The Court observed that although Section 37 imposes stringent conditions for grant of bail, such restrictions cannot be interpreted in a manner that defeats the constitutional guarantee of personal liberty under Article 21.Reliance was placed on Mohd. Muslim v. State (NCT of Delhi) (2023) where the Supreme Court emphasized that prolonged incarceration at the pre-trial stage may violate Article 21 even in cases under special statutes imposing stringent bail conditions.The Court further relied on coordinate bench decision in Bantu v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi dealing with absence of independent witnesses and non-documentation of seizures through videography or photography.In this backdrop it observed,“In the present case, although the alleged seizure was effected near a Police Colony at about 07:40 PM, no public witnesses were associated. Further, the seizure was neither photographed nor videographed. The aforesaid binding authorities thus support the applicant.”As such, the Court granted bail subject to conditions.Appearance: Mr. Ankit Sharma, Advocate for Petitioner; Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP with SI Sohan Thakur. Case title: Sarfaraj v. StateCase no.: BAIL APPLN. 1455/2026Click here to read order

Lack Of Public Witnesses, Videography Of Contraband Recovery Relevant Factors For Bail In NDPS Cases: Delhi High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Lack Of Public Witnesses, Videography Of Contraband Recovery Relevant Factors For Bail In NDPS Cases: Delhi High Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers