1995 (1) TMI 141 - HC - Customs

Summary

Issues:
1. Cancellation of bail granted to the respondent under Sections 21 and 23 read with Section 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
2. Maintainability of the petition for cancellation of bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
3. Applicability of Section 167(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for remand prisoners of narcotic offences.

Analysis:
1. The respondent was arrested for alleged offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act. The Special Judge granted bail to the respondent, which was challenged through a petition for cancellation of bail. The prosecution argued against bail based on the seriousness of the offence, incriminating documents, and the risk of the respondent escaping to his home country. The defense contended that the petition for cancellation of bail was not maintainable under Section 439 of the Code.

2. Both sides presented arguments citing legal precedents. However, a recent Division Bench decision clarified that a remand prisoner in narcotic cases cannot be detained beyond a certain period. This decision overshadowed the previous arguments as the respondent had been in custody for more than 90 days. The defense invoked Section 167(2) of the Code to seek the respondent's release, which was opposed by the prosecution on the grounds that the respondent was not continuously in custody due to the bail granted earlier.

3. The respondent had been released on bail but subsequently detained under the P.I.T. N.D.P.S. Act. The prosecution argued that Section 167(2) of the Code was not applicable since the respondent had enjoyed liberty after the initial bail. However, the court disagreed, emphasizing that the purpose of Section 167 was to ensure timely investigations. The court ruled that the respondent should be released as he had been in custody for over 90 days without completing the investigation, reinstating the original bail order by the Special Judge.

4. The petition for cancellation of bail was dismissed, restoring the Special Judge's order, subject to the respondent's detention under any other statute. The related petition was deemed unnecessary and dismissed accordingly. The judgment clarified the application of legal provisions regarding bail cancellation and the rights of remand prisoners in narcotic cases.

End of Analysis