2021 (12) TMI 1522 - SCH - Indian Laws

Seeking grant of bail - Smuggling large quantities of narcotics and psychotropic drugs from the Indira Gandhi International Airport - HELD THAT - What persuades to pass an order in favour of the appellant is the fact that despite the rigors of Section 37 of the said Act in the present case though charge sheet was filed on 23.09.2018 even the charges have not been framed nor trial has commenced. The manufacturer who sold the drugs to the appellant during the sunset clause himself has been granted bail. Bail granted to the appellant on terms and conditions to the satisfaction of the trial Court - appeal allowed.

Summary

**Supreme Court of India Judgment Summary****Case Overview:**The Supreme Court, with Justices Sanjay Kishan Kaul and M.M. Sundresh presiding, addressed an appeal involving a Syrian national, the appellant, accused of smuggling narcotics. The Narcotic Control Bureau (NCB) apprehended a Turkish national, Erbil Han, at Indira Gandhi International Airport with Tramadol X-225 tablets. Han implicated the appellant in his statement under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, claiming the appellant provided the drugs.**Key Legal Points:**- **Tramadol X-225:** Initially a regular medicine, it was notified as a psychotropic drug on 26.04.2018, with a sunset clause of three months.- **Appellant's Defense:** The appellant argued that the drugs were sold by the manufacturer against cash on 25.10.2017, before the sunset clause expired. The manufacturer has already been granted bail.- **Custody and Trial Delays:** The appellant has been in custody since 27.09.2018. Despite the charge sheet being filed on 23.03.2019, charges have not been framed, and the trial has not commenced.**Court's Decision:**The Court was persuaded to grant bail due to the delay in trial proceedings, despite the stringent requirements of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. The appellant is to be released on bail under conditions set by the trial court, including weekly reporting and the deposit of travel documents and the refugee certificate.**Conclusion:**The appeal was allowed, and the appellant was granted bail, with parties bearing their own costs.