Back
2025 Supreme(Online)(Del) 5363
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Neena Bansal Krishna, J
PRINCE CHINECHEREM ONOH – Appellant
Versus
STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI – Respondent
BAIL APPLN. 1057/2025
For the Appellant: Arun K Shrivastava, Shahina, Praveen, Ashish Sindhu
For the Respondent: Utkarsh
Procedural lapses in drug cases do not automatically justify bail, especially when serious charges are involved.
Headnote:(A) Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 - Sections 483 and 528 - Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Section 21 - Bail application - Accused seeks bail alleging false implication and procedural lapses in arrest and recovery - The absence of independent witnesses during search and failure to adhere to mandatory procedures were highlighted as grounds for bail. (Paras 1-4)
(B) Bail - Considerations for Granting - The court noted that the seriousness of the offence and ongoing trial proceedings weigh against granting bail, despite the applicant's claims of innocence and lengthy judicial custody. It emphasized the ongoing trial must proceed without undue influence of pre-trial release. (Paras 24-25)
Facts of the case:
The applicant was arrested for possession of heroin without compliance to all statutory requirements during the seizure, claiming to have been falsely implicated in the charge. The case is a drug-related offence involving over 280 grams of narcotic substances.
Findings of Court:
The application for bail was dismissed, noting the gravity of the offence and ongoing trial proceedings justified the applicant's continued detention.
Issues: Whether the failure to comply with procedural standards for search and seizure warranted the grant of bail and the implications of judicial custody duration on bail eligibility.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found that the procedural discrepancies raised by the applicant did not merit a conclusion of false implication and held that the gravity of the narcotics offence justified denial of bail.
Result: Application for bail dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. application for bail based on innocence and procedural issues. (Para 1) |
| 2. allegations of fabricated evidence and improper seizure procedure. (Para 2) |
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE NEENA BANSAL KRISHNA J U D G M E N T (oral)
1. First Application under Section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as “ BNSS read with Section 528 of BNSS has been filed on behalf of the Applicant Prince Chinecherem Onoh for grant of Regular Bail in case FIR No.655/2021 under Section 21 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as “NDPS Act”) and Section 14-A Foreigners Act, 1946 .
2. The Applicant submits that he is innocent and has been falsely Signature Not Verified Signed By:RITA BAIL APPLN.1057/2025 Page 1 of 7 implicated based on false, fabricated and concocted story advanced by the Prosecution. It suffers from serious discrepancies, infirmity and inherent contradictions which goes to the root of the matter. The Chargesheet had been filed without FSL Report and was incomplete entitling the Applicant to statutory Bail.
3. The search and seizure procedure also stands vitiated as it was not conducted in the presence of independent witnesses from the public and also was not in consonance with the mandatory provisions of Section 42 and 50 NDPS Act.
4. Admittedly, sample of the alleged recovered substance was not drawn at the spot at the time of seizure on 19.11.2021, but the sample was drawn on 20.11.2021 in the Court of Ld. MM in the proceedings under Section 52 of the NDPS Act, where the weight of the substance along with the polythene bag was found to be 282 grams, whereas the weight of the polythene bag along with its contents at the time of recovery was of 280 grams. There is every possibility of the case property having been tampered.
5. It is further submitted that the Applicant is languishing in jail since 19.11.2021 i.e. for more than 3 years. He is not required for investigations. The trial is likely to take long to conclude. The circumstances and the investigations conducted do not reflect any likelihood of the trial resulting in conviction. Keeping of Applicant in Jail for a longer period would not serve any purpose.
6. It is further submitted that the Applicant is not a previous convict. There is no circumstance suggestive of his likelihood of his fleeing or of repeating the offence if enlarged on Bail. He is a law-abiding person and Signature Not Verified Signed By:RITA BAIL APPLN.1057/2025 Page 2 of 7 undertakes to co-operate with the Prosecution in the progress of trial and shall make himself available at all the stages of trial.
7. His Bail Application filed before the learned Special Judge, has been dismissed vide Order dated 22.10.2024.
8. A prayer is made that he be granted Bail.
9. The Status Report has been filed on behalf of the State, wherein it is stated that on 19.11.2021 at about 12:30 P.M on the basis of a secret information, a raiding team was constituted and at about 03:40 P.M the Applicant was spotted walking towards Ganda Nala Road, matching the description provided in the secret information. He was intercepted and the procedure under Section 50 NDPS Act was duly forwarded. The Applicant opted to get the search conducted in the presence of a Gazetted Officer. Accordingly, ACP, Sub-Division, Najafgarh arrived on the scene and the personal search was conducted in accordance with law. From the right-side pocket of the black lower worn by the Applicant, a light brown powdery substance was recovered, which on testing was found to be Heroin. The weight of the substance was found to be 280 grams. Two samples of 10 gms each were drawn from the recovered heroin for the purpose of sending them to Forensic Science Laboratory for chemical analysis. Both the bulk quantity and the drawn samples were duly sealed with the seal of I.O. in separate parcels and the seal impression was preserved for evidentiary purpose. Necessary seizure memos were prepared on the spot
