Right To Speedy Trial Can't Remain Dead Letter: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Person Accused With Commercial Quantity Ecstasy

"Speedy Justice is a Fundamental Right enshrined under the ambit of Article 21 of the Constitution of India, and the same needs to be given effect by this Court in letter and in spirit, else it will remain as a dead letter of law," the Delhi High Court observed on Tuesday. The remarks were made while granting bail to an accused under the Narcotics, Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, languishing in jail for more than four years. Justice Chandra Dhari Singh was hearing the regular bail application filed by Mahesh, who was allegedly found to be in possession of 20 grams of Ecstasy (commercial quantity). The investigation against him was complete and chargesheet was also filed before the Sessions Court. Charges were framed against him in November 2018 under Sections 22 and 29 of the NDPS Act. The High Court noted that till date, out of a total of 14 witnesses only two witnesses have been examined, and as such there is no probability of the trial being concluded in the near future. "Thus, pending trial the Applicant cannot be kept incarcerated for an indefinite period. Therefore, this Court must step in to ensure that speedy justice is done, and injustice is not caused to the undertrial Applicant," the Court ordered. The Applicant had denied the allegations as false and fabricated. Advocates Akshay Bhandari and Digvijay Singh appearing for the Petitioner submitted that he has been languishing in jail for more than 4 years as an undertrial accused, whereas the main accused against whom there is an allegation of being in possession of 42 grams of Ecstasy has already been enlarged on bail. APP Kusum Dhalla for State vehemently opposed the Bail Application and submitted that the contraband recovered from the Applicant was of commercial quantity. Further, CDR analysis of mobile phones of both the accused also confirm their proximity and presence at the place of delivery of contraband. At the outset, the Court noted that bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot be granted for offences involving commercial quantity unless the two-fold conditions are met: First, hearing the Public Prosecutor and second, satisfaction of the court based on reasonable grounds that the accused is not guilty of the offence and that he is likely to not commit an offence of a similar nature. It added that the fetters on the power to grant bail do not end here, they are over and above the consideration of relevant factors under Section 439 CrPC that must be done while considering the question of granting bail. S. 37 NDPS Act| Court's Prima Facie Satisfaction In Favour Of Accused Must Be Based On 'Reasonable Grounds': Delhi High Court In the instant case, the Court noted that neither the Status Report nor the APP in the course of arguments has cited the previous involvement of the Applicant in any other criminal cases, and as such the Applicant has clean antecedents. "In light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, prima facie the second condition prescribed under the section is satisfied. This Court is satisfied that there are reasonable grounds, based on the analysis of the provision in the foregoing paragraphs and its application to the facts of the case, that the Applicant praying for regular bail can be allowed indulgence of this Court." Further, the Court noted that the main accused, charged with the possession of a larger quantity of contraband and on the basis of whose statement the Applicant was arraigned, has already been released on bail. Thus, it was of the opinion that the application of the Applicant merits indulgence on the ground of parity. Case Title: Mahesh v. State Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Del) 108 Click Here To Download Order

Right To Speedy Trial Can't Remain Dead Letter: Delhi High Court Grants Bail To Person Accused With Commercial Quantity Ecstasy

Akshita Saxena

Tags