Facts of the Case

The applicant, Jalal Ahmad, filed a criminal miscellaneous bail application before the Allahabad High Court in connection with Case Crime No. 137 of 2022, registered under Sections 8, 21 and 22 of the NDPS Act at Police Station Nautanwa, District Maharajganj.

The applicant contended that he was innocent and had been falsely implicated. It was submitted that he was a valid licence holder under the Drugs and Cosmetics law and had produced GST invoices along with purchase bills showing that the medicines allegedly recovered had been lawfully procured from authorised companies.

According to the applicant, the allegation that the medicines were illegally stored at his residence was fabricated by the police. It was further argued that there were no independent witnesses supporting the prosecution case and that the applicant had remained in judicial custody since 21 July 2022.

Issues Involved

  1. Whether the applicant was entitled to bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
  2. Whether the alleged non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act constituted a relevant factor for granting bail.
  3. Whether the available material justified continued detention during the pendency of trial.

Petitioner’s Arguments

  • The applicant was falsely implicated in the criminal case.
  • He possessed a valid licence under the Drugs and Cosmetics law.
  • GST invoices and purchase bills established that the medicines had been legally purchased from authorised companies.
  • The allegation regarding illegal storage of medicines at his residence was false and fabricated.
  • No independent witness supported the prosecution's version.
  • The applicant had remained in custody since 21 July 2022.
  • Questions regarding voluntariness of consent and compliance with statutory safeguards could only be determined during trial.
  • Prima facie non-compliance with the mandatory requirements of Section 50 of the NDPS Act entitled the applicant to consideration for bail under Section 37.
  • The applicant undertook not to misuse the liberty of bail and to cooperate in the trial proceedings.

Respondent’s Arguments

The State opposed the bail application.

The prosecution relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Keshari (2007) 7 SCC 798, contending that while considering bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, the Court is not required to record a finding of acquittal or determine the guilt of the accused. The Court is only required to examine whether reasonable grounds exist for believing that the accused is not guilty for the limited purpose of deciding the bail application.

Court Order / Findings

The Allahabad High Court considered:

  • the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in Union of India vs. Shiv Shankar Keshari (2007) 7 SCC 798;
  • the safeguards contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act;
  • the constitutional mandate under Article 21;
  • the nature of accusations;
  • the evidence available on record;
  • the severity of punishment;
  • the character and circumstances of the applicant;
  • the likelihood of securing his presence during trial; and
  • the possibility of witness tampering.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the prosecution case, the Court held that the matter was a fit case for grant of bail.

Accordingly, the Court directed the release of the applicant on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond and two sureties, along with several conditions to ensure his presence before the Trial Court and to prevent misuse of the liberty granted.

Important Clarification

  • Bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act does not require the Court to conclusively determine the innocence of the accused.
  • At the bail stage, the Court only examines whether reasonable grounds exist for granting bail without adjudicating the merits of the prosecution case.
  • Alleged non-compliance with Section 50 of the NDPS Act may be considered while deciding a bail application, but its final determination remains a matter for trial.
  • Grant of bail remains subject to strict compliance with conditions imposed by the Court, and any breach may result in cancellation of bail.

Sections Involved

  • Sections 8, 21 & 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act)
  • Section 37 of the NDPS Act
  • Section 50 of the NDPS Act
  • Article 21 of the Constitution of India
  • Section 229-A IPC
  • Section 174-A IPC
  • Section 82 Cr.P.C.
  • Section 313 Cr.P.C

Link to Download the Order

https://www.mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1785408873_2427compressed.pdf

Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.