9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved: Bail application under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
Summary: The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal in a case where the respondent-accused was apprehended with opium, leading to a bail application rejected by the trial court and subsequently granted by the High Court. The appellant-State argued that the High Court erred in granting bail, disregarding Section 37 of the Act, which deems offences under the Act as cognizable and non-bailable. The Court noted that the purpose of the Act is to combat drug trafficking, emphasizing that bail is generally denied for offences punishable with imprisonment of five years or more, unless certain conditions are met. Referring to previous judgments, the Court highlighted that bail provisions are stringent under the Act, with exceptions for specific offences. In this case, the High Court judge granted bail based on personal observations of the accused's conduct during arrest, which the Court found unjustified. The Court emphasized that successive bail applications must show changed circumstances, as seeking bail without such changes amounts to seeking a review of the earlier decision, which is impermissible in criminal law. Ultimately, the Supreme Court held that the High Court's order granting bail disregarded the Act's provisions and bail conditions under the Code of Criminal Procedure, rendering it unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, the impugned order was set aside, and the accused was directed to surrender, with his bail bonds canceled and to be taken into custody for the trial of the charged offence.
|
