Supreme Court: In a criminal appeal filed against the order passed by the Delhi High Court, wherein the Court refused to grant of default bail to the accused under Sections 21, 29, 61 and 85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘NDPS Act’), has been turned down, the division bench of Surya Kant and KV Viswanathan, JJ. while considering the totality of the circumstances, especially the period of custody the accused underwent, the Court granted him bail subject to certain conditions.
In this case, it was alleged that the accused along with the main accused and the other co-accused were apprehended on 25-03-2022 near Mahavir Vatika and 340 gms of smack (morphine) was recovered from their possession. The FIR was registered and consequently, the accused was arrested on the spot. Thereafter, a charge sheet was filed. The said charge-sheet was not accompanied by any FSL/ Chemical examiner report to certify that the substance recovered from the accused, or his co-accused was a contraband (smack). Accordingly, the accused applied for default bail on the ground that the charge sheet was incomplete, However, the High Court rejected the same.
The Court refused to entertain the accused’s prayer for grant of default bail. Instead, proceeded to consider his prayer for regular bail.
The Court noted that the main accused has been granted interim bail by this Court. Further, the accused has spent more than 1 year and 11 months in custody.
The Bench said that the investigation is completed but framing of the charges is yet to be done. Thus, the conclusion of the trial will take time. It also noted that there are no criminal antecedents.
As per the Court it is a seriously debatable question of fact whether the accused was also found in conscious possession of contraband. Further, it said that such a question of fact will be determined by the Trial Court at an appropriate stage. Thus, the twin test of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, need not be invoked against the accused.
Thus, while considering the totality of the circumstances, especially the period of custody the accused underwent, the Court granted him bail subject to certain conditions.
[Naeem Ahmed v Govt of NCT of Delhi, 2024 SCC OnLine SC 220, Order dated 28-02-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case :
For Petitioner(s): Advocate Akshay Bhandari, AOR Ashish Batra
For Respondent(s): ASG K.M. Nataraj, AOR Mukesh Kumar Maroria, Advocate Shailesh Madiyal, Advocate Vatsal Joshi, Advocate Sharath Nambiar, Advocate Navanjay Mahapatra, Advocate Sachin Sharma, Advocate Priyanka Das
