Summary
The Supreme Court set aside bail in commercial-quantity hashish-oil prosecutions because the High Court had not recorded the statutory satisfaction required by Section 37 NDPS Act. Custody duration, completion of investigation and bail to co-accused did not dispense with those additional restrictions. The asserted retaliatory implication did not establish the necessary basis on this record. Bail bonds were cancelled, custody directed and trial expedited.
Issues
- Whether the bail orders satisfied the additional mandatory restrictions governing these commercial-quantity NDPS offences.
Provisions considered
- Section 37, Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Where opposed by the prosecutor, bail required reasonable grounds for believing the accused not guilty and unlikely to commit an offence on bail, in addition to ordinary bail limitations. (¶¶ 18, 19, 20, 21, 22)
Held
- Section 37’s restrictions supplement ordinary bail law. The required belief in non-guilt must rest on substantial probable causes, beyond mere prima facie grounds, and the court must also address the statutory condition concerning offending while on bail. The High Court had failed to record the mandatory satisfaction. (¶¶ 18, 19, 20, 21, 22)
- Unchallenged bail to other accused did not free this respondent from Section 37. The High Court’s reliance on custody duration and completed investigation could not substitute for compliance with that provision. (¶¶ 6, 7, 22, 23)
- The claim of retaliatory implication arising from a prior corruption prosecution remained conjectural on this record. The accused retained the opportunity to advance their submissions before the trial court; no final guilt determination was made. (¶ 24)
Result
Appeals allowed; High Court orders granting bail set aside, bail bonds cancelled and accused directed to be taken into custody. Trial court directed to expedite trial; pending applications disposed of.