2024 Supreme(Online)(SC) 5376
C.T.RAVIKUMAR, RAJESH BINDAL, JJ
DEVENDRA KUMAR MISHRA @ BADE GURU – Appellant
Versus
THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH – Respondent
SLP(Crl) No.-014639 / 2023
03-01-2024
Advocates:
KAILASH PRASHAD PANDEY
The court emphasized the importance of fair trial rights, granting bail due to prolonged custody and incomplete prosecution witness examination.
Headnote:(A) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 - Sections 8, 21, and 22 - M.P. Drug Control Act, 1949 - Section 5/13 - Bail application rejected by High Court - Petitioner has been in custody since 26.11.2022 - Only 3 out of 10 prosecution witnesses examined - Petitioner involved in another NDPS case but acquitted - Court finds grounds for bail due to duration of custody and incomplete prosecution. (Paras 1-3)
(B) Bail - Considerations for granting bail include duration of custody and progress of trial - The court emphasizes that the petitioner can be released on bail subject to conditions imposed by the Trial Court. (Paras 3-4)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner challenges the High Court's order rejecting bail in a case involving serious drug-related charges, having been in custody for over a year with limited progress in the trial.
Findings of Court:
The court orders the release of the petitioner on bail, considering the time spent in custody and the status of the trial.
Issues: The main issues addressed include the appropriateness of bail given the duration of custody and the examination of prosecution witnesses.
Ratio Decidendi: The court ruled that the petitioner should be granted bail due to the significant time spent in custody and the incomplete examination of witnesses, highlighting the importance of fair trial rights.
Result: Special Leave Petition disposed of, bail granted.
ORDER
1. In the captioned Special Leave Petition, the petitioner seeks to assail order dated 03.08.2023 passed by the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur in Misc. Criminal Case No.30836/2023. Vide the said order, the application for bail moved by the petitioner was rejected. The petitioner is standing trial on the charge of commission of offences under Sections 8 , 21 and 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 and under Section 5 /13 of the M.P. Drug Control Act, 1949 (NDPS). The petitioner has been in custody in the case since 26.11.2022. Digitally signed by Vijay Kumar Date: 2024.01.03 15:51:34 IST Reason:
Signature Not Verified 2. Heard learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and also the learned standing counsel appearing for the respondent-State of Madhya Pradesh. 3. It is submitted by the learned standing counsel for the respondent-State that out of 10 prosecution witnesses, 03 have been examined. That apart, it is submitted that the petitioner had also involved in another NDPS case. The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that in the other case under the NDPS Act, the petitioner has already been acquitted. Taking note of the fact that the petitioner has been in custody since 26.11.2022 and only 03 out of 10 prosecution witnesses are examined and further the nature of the charge, we are of the view that the petitioner can be ordered to be released on bail, subject to the terms and conditions to be imposed by the Trial Court. Ordered accordingly. In that regard, the petitioner shall be produced before the Trial Curt, forthwith. 4. The Special Leave Petition is disposed of, as above. 5. Pending application(s), if any shall stand disposed of. (VIJAY KUMAR) (MATHEW ABRAHAM) COURT MASTER (SH) COURT MASTER (NSH)
Click Here to Read the rest of this document
Back
