Recently, the Punjab & Haryana High Court granted regular bail to an accused in an NDPS case, emphasising concerns over prolonged pre-trial detention and the fundamental right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The case originated when the Petitioner, along with a co-accused, was apprehended near Railway Quarters, Amritsar, on suspicion of drug trafficking. During the search, 279 grams of Heroin were allegedly recovered from the co-accused, slightly exceeding the threshold limit for non-commercial quantity under the NDPS Act, 1985. The petitioner has been in custody since July 2025, awaiting the conclusion of the investigation and trial.
Counsel for the Petitioner argued that the mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act were not complied with and maintained that the petitioner had been falsely implicated. The defense highlighted precedents where courts granted bail in cases where the contraband quantity was only marginally above the non-commercial threshold, stressing that the petitioner’s continued detention was causing undue hardship.
The State, opposing the bail plea, submitted that the allegations were serious in nature and invoked Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which imposes stringent restrictions on granting bail in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics.
Upon reviewing the records, the Court observed that the trial was likely to be prolonged, with 13 prosecution witnesses yet to be examined and charges yet to be framed. It noted that the petitioner had already suffered more than three months of incarceration. The Court emphasised that delays in the judicial process, which are not attributable to the accused, cannot justify indefinite pre-trial detention.
Citing precedents from both the Supreme Court and the Punjab & Haryana High Court, the Court highlighted the importance of a speedy trial as an essential component of the right to life and liberty under Article 21. It held that while Section 37 of the NDPS Act aims to prevent drug offences, it cannot override the constitutional protection against undue detention caused by judicial delays.
Accordingly, the Court granted regular bail to the petitioner, subject to standard conditions including the deposition of a passport, regular reporting to the trial court, prohibition from tampering with evidence, and ensuring that the accused does not commit any offence during the bail period. The ruling clarifies that bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act can be considered when delays in trial risk transforming pre-trial detention into punitive incarceration.
Case Title: Bablu alias Ballu v. State of Punjab
Case No.: CRM-M No.64857 of 2025
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sumeet Goel
Counsel for the Petitioner: Adv. Ashish Kaushik and Adv. APS Sandhu
Counsel for the Respondent: Addl. AG, Punjab Baljinder Singh Sra
Read Judgement @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
