IMPORTANT POINT
The right to a speedy trial is fundamental, and prolonged detention without trial violates the accused's rights, warranting bail.

ORDER :

1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing an application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:

2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. There are no factors at play in the case at hand that may work against grant of bail to the accused-petitioner and he has been made an accused based on conjectures and surmises.

3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Government Advocate opposes the bail application and submits that the present case is not fit for enlargement of accused on bail.

4. I have considered the submissions made by the parties and have perused the material available on record.

5. The petitioner has filed instant bail application on the ground that he is in custody since 07.11.2022 and out of total 23 witnesses, 3 witnesses have been examined in the trial till date, thus, looking to the snail pace progress of the trial, he has approached this Court for protecting his liberty.

6. It is not disputed that the petitioner is behind the bar in this case since 07.11.2022. It is a case of the prosecution that on 07.11.2022 while on patrolling duty, upon receiving information Shri Ram Pratap Godara, Sub-Inspector, Police Station Sardar Shahar, Churu intercepted a vehicle bearing registration No.DL2-CAD-7821. Upon interrogation, the driver of the said vehicle disclosed his name as Jagtar Singh and the person sitting by his side was Gurvindra Singh. On search being made, 36 boxes of Tramadol & 50 boxes of Alprazolam Tablets; the total weight of these tablets were 9 Kg 720 gms and 5 Kg 50gms respectively. The IO took samples, marked them and sent to the FSL for its chemical examination. The accused were arrested and a case under Section 8/22 of the NDPS Act came to be registered against them. During investigation, it was stated by them that one Vikas has supplied the said medicinal drugs to them.

7. It is a firm view of this Court that an under trial prisoner cannot be incarcerated for an indefinite period. Only a reasonable time can be granted to the prosecution to prove its case and at the same time, the accused cannot be left languishing in jail for want of evidence against him as he required to be presumed innocent until the guilt is proven.

8. Ordinarily, trial of a Session’s case is expected to be completed within a session i.e., within a period of one year from its commencement, however, for some unavoidable and inevitable circumstances, the period can be extended but keeping the accused detained in jail for around 2 years for the purpose of production of evidence is detrimental to the interest of accused detained in jail.

9. This Court has made an elaborate discussion with regard to bail of an under trial accused on the ground of delay in culmination of the trial. This Court feels that if the accused is under detention, it is obligatory for the prosecution to complete the trial within a reasonable period. This Court has passed an elaborated order dated 08.02.2024 in the case of Lichhaman Ram @ Laxman Ram Vs. State of Rajasthan (S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.5916/2023); the relevant part of the said order is being reproduced as under:-

7. This Court feels that the nature and gravity of offence and availability of material in support thereof are not the only factors to be taken into account while considering a bail application. The fact that trial is