9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (4) TMI 1333X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sions made by learned Single Bench while making reference to the Larger Bench read as under:- "इस न्यायालय के समक्ष उपरोक्त विवाद बिन्दु की रोशनी में यह प्रश्न उत्पन्न होता है कि जहां 2009 AIR SCW 3648 (Union of India Vs. Rattan Malik @ Habul) में धारा 37 " अधिनियम, 1985" के विशेष प्रावधानों को दृष्टिगत रखते हुए अन्य उच्च न्यायालय द्वारा ज ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... #2340; किया गया है एवं उस उद्धरण की व्याख्या के अनुसार पश्चातवर्ती निर्णय 2009 AIR SCW 3648 (Union of India VS . Rattan Mallik Habul) के आधार पर सम्बन्धित प्रार्थी /अभियुक्त को जमानत की सुविधा प्रदान किया जाना उचित नहीं माना गया है, तदुपरान्त अधिवक्ता प्रार् ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ;, यह एक महत्वपूर्ण बिन्दु "स्वापक औषधि एवं मन:प्रभावी पदार्थ अधिनियम, 1985" की धारा 37 की रोशनी में (वाणिज्यिक मात्रा से सम्बन्धित प्रकरणों में) किस उद्धरण ({2004} 13 SCC 42 व 2009 AIR SCW 3648) में प्रतिपादित सिद्धान्त के आधार पर आदेश पारित कि& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... not guilty of the offence for which he is convicted and he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail and during period of suspension of the sentence. The Court further held : (SCC pp.431- 32, paras 6-8) "6. The aforesaid section is incorporated to achieve the object as mentioned in the Statement of Objects and Reasons for introducing Bill No.125 of 1988 thus : 'Even though the major offences are non-bailable by virtue of the level of punishments, on technical grounds, drug offenders were being released on bail. In the light of certain difficulties faced in the enforcement of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, the need to amend the law to further strengthen it, has been felt.' 7. It is to be borne in mind that the aforesaid legislative mandate is required to be adhered to and followed. It should be borne in mind that in a murder case, the accused commits murder of one or two persons, while those persons who are dealing in narcotic drugs are instrumental in causing death or in inflicting death-blow to a number of innocent young victims, who are vulnerable; it causes deleterious effects and a deadly impact on the society; they are a hazard ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... it proper to grant such application, is under a statutory obligation to record its satisfaction. The findings arrived by Hon'ble the Supreme Court in the case of Rattan Mallik (supra) read as under:- "12. It is plain from a bare reading of the non obstante clause in Section 37 of the NDPS Act and sub-section (2) thereof that the power to grant bail to a person accused of having committed offence under the NDPS Act is not only subject to the limitations imposed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, it is also subject to the restrictions placed by clause (b) of sub-section (1) of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Apart from giving an opportunity to the Public Prosecutor to oppose the application for such release, the other twin conditions viz. (i)the satisfaction of the court that there are reasonable grounds for believing that the accused is not guilty of the alleged offence; and (ii) that he is not likely to commit any offence while on bail, have to be satisfied. It is manifest that the conditions are cumulative and not alternative. The satisfaction contemplated regarding the accused being not guilty, has to be based on "reasonable grounds". 13. The expressi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lowed. It is directed that on the appellant depositing the amount of fine, the execution of the sentence of imprisonment shall remain suspended during the hearing of the appeal by the High Court and the appellant shall be released on bail to the satisfaction of the trial court for appearance consistently with the judgment of the High Court." In the case of Mansingh (supra) Hon'ble the Supreme Court granted an application seeking suspension of sentence during pendency of an appeal before the High Court by taking into consideration the substantial period of imprisonment already undergone and further the circumstance of no likelihood of expeditious hearing of the appeal. Learned Single Bench of this Court while referring the issue for consideration to the Larger Bench noticed that while laying down the law in the case of Rattan Mallik (supra) for considering bail applications/ applications seeking suspension of sentence, has not taken into consideration the order passed in the case of Mansingh (supra) and that demands necessary guidance as to which one precedent is to be followed. As already stated the effect, implication and need of the operation of Section 37 of the Act of 19 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e construed in a wide sense to effectuate the purpose of conferment of power. This power has been conferred on the Apex Court only and the exercise of that power is not dependent or conditioned by any statutory provision. The constitutional plenitude of the powers of the Apex Court is to ensure due and proper administration of justice and is intended to be co-extensive in each case with the needs of justice of a given case and to meeting any exigency. Very wide powers have been conferred on this Court for due and proper administration of justice and whenever the Court sees that the demand of justice warrants exercise of such powers, it will reach out to ensure that justice is done by resorting to this extraordinary power conferred to meet precisely such a situation. True it is, that the power must be exercised sparingly for furthering the ends of justice but it cannot be said that its exercise is conditioned by any statutory provision. Any such view would defeat the very purpose and object of conferment of this extraordinary power. In the Union Carbide case this Court observed as under: (SCC p.634, para 83) "It is necessary to set at rest certain misconceptions in the arguments t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As already stated, the order passed in the case of Mansingh (supra) is a reflection of the authority exercised under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, thus, is not having a binding effect or in other words, an authority of precedent for the High Court or the other courts subordinate. The judgments given in the case of Dadu alias Tulsidas v. State of Maharashtra (supra) and Rattan Mallik (supra) are laying down law, hence, are having binding effect and those are required to be adhered in their true spirit. Looking to the discussions made above, our conclusion is that the applications preferred by an accused of the offences punishable under Sections 19, 24 and 27 A under the Act of 1985 and also for the offences involving commercial quantity of contraband for his release on bail or for suspension of sentence are required to be considered by the High Courts or the trial courts, as the case may be, by taking into consideration the provisions of Section 37 of the Act of 1985 . The law discussed and settled in the case of Dadu alias Tulsidas v. State of Maharashtra (supra) and Rattan Mallik (supra), thus, is to be followed by the courts while dealing with the applications submi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
