ORDER

Date : 17.10.2023 Heard Mr. G. Saikia, learned counsel appearing for the accused petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, D.R.I, assisted by Ms. R. Deka, learned counsel.

2. By this second petition under Section 439 Cr.P.C., the accused/petitioner, namely, Pranab Das, has prayed for grant of bail in connection with NDPS Case No.102/2019 arising out of NCB Crime No.09/2019 under Sections 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act.

3. The scanned copy of case record, as called for, is placed before the Court.

4. The earlier bail application of the accused petitioner, being B.A. No. 2166/2021, was withdrawn vide order, dated 24.03.2023 and no other bail application is pending before this Court.

5. The case relates to recovery and seizure of 1077 bottles of Codeine based cough syrup from the vehicle of the accused petitioner.

6. It is noticed that the accused petitioner has been in judicial custody since

18.06.2019, i.e., for 4 years 6 months.

7. Perusal of the case record reveals that charges under Sections 21(c)/29 of the NDPS Act are framed against the accused petitioner and two others, vide order, dated 14.03.2022. However, out of eight listed prosecution witnesses, only two witnesses have been examined in the case till date.

8. It is noticed that the conduct of some co-accused persons, on the other hand, are not satisfactory as they defaulted in appearance to participate in the trial of the case despite coercive actions were being initiated against them and sometimes, as noted by the learned trial Court, for want of due diligence of the prosecution D.R.I. in taking timely steps as per directions of the Court, the cumulative consequence of which is the inordinate delay in disposal of the case against the present accused petitioner although he has been languishing in judicial custody since 18.06.2019, i.e., for 4 years 6 months. The situation is alarming in the case entailing deprivation of the present accused petitioner’s right to speedy justice as envisaged in Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

9. It may be mentioned that the Intelligence Officer of D.R.I. has submitted objection against grant of bail to the accused petitioner by citing various grounds based on evidence that was collected and found during investigation into the case, whereas the instant case is pending for trial, after offence report was submitted, before the Court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge No. 1, Kamrup (M) at Guwahati.

10. In the backdrop of the above facts and circumstances as well as the bar contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act, this Court is of the opinion that at the present stage, it is expedient in the interest of a fair trial of the case that at least some material witnesses should be examined before considering release of the accused petitioner on bail.

11. Accordingly, it is provided that the learned trial Court shall complete examination of the listed witnesses within a period of 3 (three) months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order, failing which, the accused shall be released on bail subject to stringent conditions.

12. Furnish a copy of this order to Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing Counsel, D.R.I. so that he can cause urgent taking of steps to produce the witnesses on the next dates fixed for evidence.

Registry to forward a copy of this order to the learned Trial Court.

With the above direction, the bail application stands disposed of.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant