Undue delay in trial justifies granting bail, even under stringent provisions of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

JUDGMENT :

Harpreet Singh Brar, J.

Prayer in this 3rd petition filed under Section 483 of the BNSS , 2023, is for grant of regular bail to the petitioner in FIR No.10 dated 08.04.2023 registered under Section 18 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short ‘the NDPS Act’) at Police Station GRP Sirsa, District GRP Ambala (wrongly mentioned “Khuian Sarwar, District Fazilka” in the prayer clause of the petition).

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the 2nd petition seeking regular bail to the petitioner was dismissed as withdrawn on 06.08.2024 and now, the instant 3rd petition has been filed on account of delay in conclusion of the trial and the petitioner is behind the bars for the last 01 year and 10 months and out of 10 PWs only 02 PWs have been examined.

3. As per the prosecution case, on 08.04.2023, at around 11:20 hrs, SI Ranbir Singh and his team were performing routine duties at Mandi Dabwali Railway Station when they observed a young man, Sanjay Singh @ Ajay, acting suspiciously while carrying a red backpack. When approached, the suspect appeared nervous and tried to turn back but was immediately apprehended. Upon questioning, he failed to provide any satisfactory explanation. After serving a notice under Section 50 of the NDPS Act, the suspect agreed for a search to be conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer. During the search, 4 kg 8 gm of Opium was found inside the backpack, wrapped in a polythene bag. The suspect revealed that he had received the Opium from a person named Sunil from Jodhpur on 07.04.2023, to deliver it to Ferozepur, Punjab. Thereafter, the FIR (supra) was registered.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner inter alia contends that the petitioner is merely acting as a courier, unaware of the full nature of the contraband, and he was given Opium by one Sunil from Jodhpur to deliver it to Ferozepur, Punjab. The petitioner is not involved in the manufacturing, distribution, or sale of the narcotics, and his role is limited to that of a courier. He further submits that the petitioner is a young individual and there is no substantial evidence to suggest that he is a habitual offender or involved in organized narcotics trafficking.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that there are total 10 prosecution witnesses cited in the list of witnesses, out of which, 02 PWs have been examined till date and the trial is likely to take long time in conclusion.

6. Per contra, learned State counsel has filed custody certificate today in the Court which is taken on record and opposes the prayer made by learned counsel for the petitioner on the ground that huge quantity of Opium weighing 4 Kg. 8 gm., was recovered from the conscious and exclusive possession of the petitioner, which falls within the ambit of commercial quantity and he is involved in one more case registered under the NDPS Act and as such, the petitioner is not entitled for any relief, however, he could not controvert the fact that the petitioner has undergone actual custody of more than 01 year and 10 months and out of 10 PWs, only 02 PWs have been examined so far.

7. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and after perusing the record of the case, it transpires that the petitioner is behind the bars from the last 01 year, 09 months and 21 days. Investigation is complete. The final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was presented before the concerned Court. Charges were framed and trial of the case has not made much progress. Out of 10 prosecution witnesses, 02 PWs have been examined so far.

8. A two Judge bench of