IMPORTANT POINT
The court affirmed that the stringent conditions for granting bail under the NDPS Act must be balanced with the constitutional right to a fair trial and the necessity for a speedy trial, allowing for bail in cases of undue delay.

ORDER :

[Arun Dev Choudhury, J.]

1. Heard Mr. A W Aman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. D. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State of Assam.

2. This is an application made under Section 439 Cr. P.C. seeking bail by the accused/petitioner, namely, Anil Malakar, who was shown arrested on 10.05.2023 in connection with Special (NDPS) Case No. 41(H)/2023 registered under Sections 20(C) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 arising out of Lumding PS case No. 181/2022.

3. Mr. Aman, learned counsel arguing for grant of bail submits that in view of the determination made by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of State vs Pallulabid Ahamed Arimutta & Others reported in 2022 12 SCC 633, the ratio laid down in the case of Tofan Singh vs State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2021) 4 SCC 1, regarding value of confessional statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, such statement shall remain inadmissible even at the stage of consideration of the bail. Therefore, in view of such settled proposition of law, the petitioner is entitled for grant of bail.

4. Per contra, Mr. Das, learned Additional Public Prosecutor relying on the judgment of the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Narcotics Control Bureau –Vs- Mohit Agarwal reported in 2022 SCC OnLine 891, argues that without having the satisfaction as regard the embargo placed in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985, only on the ground of long incarceration an accused cannot enlarged on bail. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam has vehemently raised objection to the prayer of the petitioner for granting bail to the petitioner.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the parties, perused the material available on record.

6. Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985, mandates that a Court can grant bail to an accused only after hearing the Public Prosecutor and after having satisfactions of twin conditions that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the offence charged/alleged and that, he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail. Such satisfaction, which the Court is required to record, should be based on reasonable reading and does not called for a meticulous examination of the materials collected during the investigation or during the trial otherwise, the same will amount to mean a complete denial of bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985 and the said provision would effectively exclude grant of bail altogether.

7. Grant of bail, on the ground of undue delay in the trial, cannot be said to be fettered by Section 37 of the NDPS Act, 1985, inasmuch as Section 436A of the Cr.P.C., is made applicable to the offences under the NDPS Act by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Satender Kumar Antil –VS-CBI reported in 2022 10 SCC 51.

8. Section 36A of the NDPS Act, 1985, mandates that the offences under the Act are triable by a Special Court. In the considered opinion of this Court, such mandate of the legislature is to achieve the object that the trials are completed at the earliest possible time inasmuch as the conditions of bail and other provisions under the Act, are very stringent in nature. It is also well settled that reasonable fair and just procedure in a criminal trial is a constitutional obligation on the part of the State. A speedy trial is also one of the dimensions of the fundamental right to life under Article 21 of the Constitution of India (Reference Raghubir Singh –Vs-State of Bihar 1986-4SCC-481).

9. So far relating to the constitution of Special Court, it is stated at the bar that in the State of Assam, though different Sessions Judges and Additional Sessions Judges are designated as Special Courts under Section 36A of the NDPS Act, 1985, however, these Courts are also simultaneously entrusted with the different Sessions triable offences under IPC, Criminal Appeals under IPC and to act as Special Judges under Special Act like POCSO Act, 2012. In view of such undisputed factual posi