Back
ABHAY S. OKA, UJJAL BHUYAN
Narcotic Control Bureau – Appellant
Versus
Lakhwinder Singh – Respondent
Key Points: - The High Court granted bail pending appeal after the respondent had already served 4.5 years of a 10‑year sentence, deeming the appeal unlikely to be heard before completion of the term. (!) - The Supreme Court held that the discretion to grant bail pending appeal remains intact even if the accused has not completed half of the sentence, emphasizing that a rigid half‑sentence rule would infringe Article 21 rights. (!) - The Court reiterated that the power to grant bail based on merits is preserved and should not be curtailed by any prior directives or one‑time measures. (!) - The Court confirmed that the appeal was dismissed while upholding the High Court's decision to grant bail and suspension of sentence. (!)
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. conviction and sentence details (Para 3 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. asg's reliance on precedent (Para 4) |
| 3. discretion in bail decisions (Para 8) |
JUDGMENT :
(Abhay S. Oka, J.)
1. Leave granted.
2. Heard Shri S.V. Raju, learned ASG appearing for the appellant.
3. By the impugned order, the High Court has granted relief of suspension of sentence and bail to the respondent/accused pending an appeal against the conviction. The respondent was convicted for an offence punishable under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the NDPS Act”). The substantive sentence of the respondent is 10 years of rigorous imprisonment. In the appeal of the year 2021, the High Court noted that the respondent had undergone incarceration for a period of 4 ½ years out of the fixed term sentence of 10 years. As the appeal was not likely to be heard before the completion of the sentence, the High Court granted relief of suspension of sentence and bail to the respondent.
4. The learned ASG relies upon a decision of this Court in the case of the Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee representing Undertrial Prisoners vs. Union of India & Ors., (1994) 6 SCC 731 He submitted that, as laid
The court retains discretion to grant bail pending appeal even if the accused has not served half of the sentence, emphasizing the protection of rights under Article 21.
The stringent provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act must be applied in cases where the convict/accused is unable to bring his case within the parameters of Article 21 of the Constitution of India.....
Excessive duration of custody during appeal undermines constitutional rights, warranting suspension of sentence under NDPS Act when significant time has been served and appeal hearings are delayed.
Sentence can be suspended and bail granted to accused where hearing of appeal is likely to take further more time.
The quantity of the narcotic substance recovered from the applicant's possession and the impact of drug-related offences on society influenced the court's decision to deny bail.
Suspension of sentence and bail may be granted if the applicant has served more than half of a fixed term sentence and the appeal is unlikely to be heard before the sentence is completed.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
