The court granted bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial and the prolonged custody of the petitioner, despite the serious nature of the charges.

JUDGMENT

Vikas Bahl, J. (Oral)

This is the second petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in complaint No.03/2021 dated 02.07.2021, (Annexure P-1) under Sections 8, 21, 22, 27-A, 28 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985, registered at Police Station Central Bureau of Narcotics Janak Puri, New Delhi.

2. Brief facts of the present case are that a specific information was received on 29.06.2021 by Parveen Dhull, Inspector working in the office of Superintendent Preventive and Intelligence Cell, Central Bureau of Narcotics, New Delhi to the effect that one person namely Sachin was indulging in an illegal business of narcotic and psychotropic medicines and that he had kept the said medicines without bills for doing illegal business in his house and accordingly, a raid was conducted and huge quantity of the said medicines was recovered from the house of Sachin. The details of the said medicines recovered, has been given in paragraph 3 of the complaint dated 02.07.2021 (Annexure P-1). Sachin was arrested and his statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act was recorded and in his statement, he has stated that the medicines were supplied to him by Ankur Garg, the medical representative (MR) of M/s Modi Mundi Pharma, whose mobile number was 75038-30880. It has further been recorded in the said statement (page 27 of the complaint) that certain narcotic drugs/medicines were supplied to him by one Ashish and the contact number of the said Ashish was 94562- 30620 and rest of the recovered medicines were supplied by M/s Mahavir Pharmaceuticals and contact number of M/s Mahavir Pharmaceuticals was 92120-72018. In pursuance of the said statement, Ankur Garg and Ashish were arrested. A raid was conducted in the premises of M/s Mahavir Pharmaceuticals which was a proprietorship of Yogender son of Chander Bhan and during the said raid, the present petitioner was found in the premises of M/s Mahavir Pharmaceuticals and from the said premises, several medicines and injections were recovered, the details of which have been given in paragraph 13 of the complaint. It was verified during the course of investigation that the said M/s Mahavir Pharmaceuticals had valid drug licences (Anneuxres P-2 and P-3). Yogender who was stated to be the proprietor of M/s Mahavir Pharmaceuticals, has been granted the benefit of anticipatory bail, vide order dated 05.05.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar and his statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act was also recorded. The investigation in the present case has been completed and the challan has been filed before the trial Court and the charges have already been framed and there are 24 witnesses, none of whom have been examined and the case is now fixed for 16.01.2024 for prosecution evidence. Co-accused Ashish has been granted bail by a Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in CRM-M-38557-2023, vide order dated 04.09.2023 and Ankur Garg has also been granted regular bail, vide order dated 29.05.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jhajjar.

3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner has been in custody since 01.07.2021 and there are 24 witnesses, none of whom have been examined and thus, the trial is likely to take time. It is submitted that the petitioner is not involved in any other case and the previous bail application of the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on 09.12.2022, at that stage with liberty to file an application before the trial Court for regular bail. It is further submitted that after the passing of the said order by the High Court, the petitioner had sought regular bail before the trial Court but the trial Court had rejected the said bail application, vide order dated 21.07.2023 (Annexure P-10) and thus, the petitioner has filed the present second regular bail petition before this Court. It is submitted that the trial has not made much progress as no witness has been examined in spite of the fact that the petitioner ha