The lack of timely trials and nondisclosure in police procedures can necessitate bail under the NDPS Act, highlighting the constitutional right to a speedy trial.

JUDGMENT :

JASMEET SINGH, J.

1. This is a petition filed under section 483 of BNSS seeking grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No. 500/2022, dated 06.07.2022, registered at PS Narela Industrial Area under Section 21 of the NDPS Act. The chargesheet has been filed under sections 21/25/29 of the NDPS Act.

2. As per the prosecution the facts are that on 06.07.2022 at around 1 P.M., a secret information was received to the ASI that a lady namely, Shanno r/o E-1852, J.J. Colony, Bawana, Delhi is allegedly involved in the distribution of heroin, both in bulk as well as retail quantities. Further, Shanno would come in between 03-03:30 P.M. to deliver a consignment of heroin to her customers.

3. After verifying the secret information, the ASI produced the secret informer before the concerned police officials and the secret information was given to them. Thereafter, on instructions of the ACP a raiding team was constituted, who took their position around 2:30 P.M. near the house of Shanno. Some public persons were also asked to join the raiding team, however they refused citing genuine reasons.

4. At the instance of the secret informer, at around 03 P.M., Shanno was seen coming from her house and subsequently was apprehended at 03:05 PM. She informed the ASI that she was in the business of sale and purchase of heroine both in bulk as well as retail quantities. Thereafter, she was duly informed about her legal rights and the notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act was served upon her. At, 04:40 PM, the ACP arrived and Shanno was searched by a woman Head Constable, namely, Ms. Sheenu, in her own house where one black colour polythene was recovered which contained a brown coloured powder. Upon testing the same it was found to be heroin, weighing 150 gms.

5. During investigation, Shanno disclosed that she used to procure heroin from a lady residing in J.J. Colony, Wazirpur. Thereafter, at the instance of Shanno, a raid was conducted at House no. B-52, J.J. Colony, Wazirpur, from where (1) the petitioner i.e. Seema r/o House no. C-318 J.J. Colony, Wazirpur Delhi and (2) Meenu r/o House no. B-52, J.J. Colony, Wazirpur were apprehended. On seeing the raiding team, the petitioner threw a black colour polythene under the bed, which contained a brown colour powder. On testing the same, it was found to be heroin weighing 300 grams.

6. Hence, the present petitioner was arrested.

7. Mr. Khan, learned counsel for the petitioner states that in the present case, the notice under Section 42 NDPS is faulty as there is no approval of the ACP concerned. Further, despite the police officials having prior information about the planned arrest of the petitioner, no videography or photography was conducted during the search and recovery of the alleged contraband.

8. He further submits that the petitioner is a lady and has been in custody for two and a half years. In addition, there is no other pending case against the petitioner pertaining to the NDPS Act.

9. He lastly submits that there is an inordinate delay in trial proceedings as the prosecution has cited 21 witness, out of which only 4 have been examined till date.

10. Per Contra, Ms. Dalal, learned APP states that in the present case, the recovery has taken place from residence of the petitioner and the recovery is of a commercial quantity. Hence, the petitioner will have to cross the rigors of section 37 of NDPS Act.

11. She further states that the question of non-compliance of Section 42 of NDPS Act, if any, can only be seen during the trial.

12. She places reliance on the judgment of this Court in Chidi Berr Nwayoga vs. State , 20