NDPS Act | Detaining Accused Indefinitely Due To Absence Of Witnesses Is Abuse Of Power: P&H High Court Grants Bail

Observing that "detaining an accused indefinitely due to the sheer nonchalance of the prosecution amounts to an abuse of process," the Punjab & Haryana High Court granted bail in an NDPS Act case involving a commercial quantity.

The accused was in custody for 2 years and 3 months in a case wherein 1.540 kgs of Tramadol—classified as 'commercial quantity' under the NDPS Act was recovered. Since the charges were framed in March 2023, only 03 out of 16 witnesses cited by the prosecution were examined.

Justice Manjari Nehru Kaul said, "The menace of drug trafficking is indeed a grave threat, steadily corroding, the social fabric and destroying countless lives. But the seriousness of the offence cannot become a licence to trample upon constitutional safeguards."

The repeated absence of police witnesses, despite coercive measures ordered by the Court, exhibits not just a casual approach but blatant disregard for judicial authority, added the Court.

The judge observed that, "What stares glaringly from the record is a clear pattern of neglect and indifference on the part of the prosecution witnesses, who, despite repeated judicial orders, have failed to honour summons and warrants."

Adding that "It reflects complacency, which cannot be condoned", the Court said that such conduct emanates from police officials—entrusted with the task of upholding the rule of law—is deeply concerning and unacceptable.

The petitioner was hearing the second bail in FIR under Section 22 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

Counsel for the petitioner submitted that despite the issuance of summons, including bailable and non-bailable warrants, the remaining prosecution witnesses, all of whom are police officials have failed to appear.

This pattern has persisted over no fewer than twenty-seven hearings, rendering the progress of the trial virtually stagnant, he added.

Upon pointed query of the Court, the State counsel was unable to offer any cogent explanation for the repeated defaults of the prosecution witnesses.

 The vague assurance that “they shall now appear on every future date”, lacks both credibility and conviction given the past conduct, the Court opined.

After examining the submissions, the Court said that the right to a speedy and fair trial is an intrinsic part of the right to life and personal liberty enshrined under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

"It applies equally to trials under special statutes like the NDPS Act, however grave the allegations may be," the Court emphasised.

Observing that "the delay in trial, entirely attributable to the prosecution, cannot become the basis for further incarceration of the petitioner," the Court allowed the plea.

Recording the strong disapproval of the dereliction shown by the prosecution witnesses, the Court directed the Director General of Police, Punjab, "to look into the matter and take appropriate measures to ensure that police officers summoned as prosecution witnesses in criminal trials appear without fail.

Mr. Sandeep Arora, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Shiva Khurmi, AAG, Punjab assisted by ASI Jaswinderpal

Click here to read/download the order