IMPORTANT POINT
The court reaffirmed that under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, bail is not to be granted lightly in cases involving serious narcotics offences, even in light of prolonged custody.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

PRAKASH D. NAIK, J. - These are second applications for bail. The previous application was rejected by this Court on merits vide order dtd. 14/11/2022. The applicants are facing prosecution for the offences under Ss. 8(c), 22(b), 21, 22, 27 and 29 of Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substance Act vide Special Case No.32/2021.

2. The applicant in Criminal Application (Bail) No.582/2023(Filing) was allegedly found in possession of 21 blots of LSD weighing 0.36 grams (commercial quantity) and the applicant in Criminal Application (Bail) No.584/2023(Filing) was found in possession of 8 blots of LSD weighing 0.15 grams (commercial quantity), 33 grams of Mephedrone and 5.1 grams of Heroine. On completing investigation, chargesheet was filed.

3. Both the applicants were initially granted bail by the Special Court since the CA report was not on record. However, subsequently, the CA report was brought on record and before the applicants could avail of the bail facility, the order granting bail was cancelled. The applicants then moved application before this Court which has been rejected on merits.

4. Mr Bhobe, learned advocate for the applicants submitted that the applicants are in custody from 13/3/2021 i.e., for a period 2 years and 5 months. The long incarceration is a ground for grant of bail. The rigors of Sec. 37 of the Act cannot be an impediment for grant of bail considering the fact that the applicants are in custody for substantial period of time. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Rabi Prakash v/s. The State of Odisha, 2023 LiveLaw (SC) 533 and Dheeraj Kumar Shukla v/s. The State of Uttar Pradesh, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No.6690/2022. He submitted that bail was granted to the accused who were in custody for a period of about 3 and half years and 2 and half years. It is not clear as to when the trial would be concluded. Hence, bail may be granted on terms and conditions.

5. Mr Faldessai, learned Deputy Solicitor General of India for respondent No.1 submitted that offences are of serious nature. There is bar for grant of bail under Sec. 37 of NDPS Act. Applicants were found in possession of commercial quantity of contraband. The decisions relied upon by the learned counsel does not lay down any precedent. The said decisions were passed based on the facts of those cases. The accused therein were found in possession of Ganja. However, considering the nature of contraband recovered from the possession of the applicants, bail may not be granted to them. At the most, this Court may expedite the trial by giving appropriate directions to the trial Court.

6. The previous application for bail has been rejected by this Court. The question which arises for consideration is whether bail can be granted to the applicants in the light of the incarceration undergone by them after their arrest in the present case. The applicants are in custody for a period of about 2 years and 5 months. The prosecution has listed about 13 witnesses who are proposed to be examined during the trial. It is pertinent to note that one of the applicants was found in possession of 21 blots of LSD which is commercial quantity and the other applicant was found in possession of 8 blots of LSD weighing 0.15 grams which is also commercial quantity. He was also found in possession of 33 grams of Mephedrone and 5.1 grams of Heroine. Considering the involvement of the applicants, bail cannot be granted on the ground that they are in custody for 2 years and 5 months. The trial Court can be directed to conclude the trial expeditiously.

ORDER

(i) The Criminal Application (Bail) No.582 of 2023 (Filing) and Criminal Application (Bail) No.584 of 2023 (Filing) are rejected.

(ii) The trial is expedited. The trial Court is requested to complete the trial within 6 months from the date of receipt of this order.

(iii) In the event the trial is not concluded within 6 months, the applicants are at liberty to file fresh application f