'Artificial Delay Created By Accused Not Grounds For Bail': P&H High Court Issues Directions To Fast-Track NDPS Trials

In a significant step toward expediting trials under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has issued a comprehensive set of guidelines for Special Courts to ensure the timely disposal of cases involving commercial quantities of contraband.

The Court clarified that the directions shall come into force from January 01, 2026.

It also added that, "the accused cannot be permitted first to create artificial ground for delay and then take advantage of their own wrongdoing by invoking the constitutional protection under Article 21."

The Court said, "1000 or more bottles of cough syrup, 100 ml each, containing approximately 2% of codeine phosphate; and in the case of herbal drugs namely Poppy straw, Opium, Bhang, Charas, Coca leaves, and Catha Edulis, and medicinal drugs in tablet or medicinal form and not in raw or powder form, if the weight is more than Twenty-five times (25 Times) of commercial; and in all other drugs, medicinal drugs in raw and powder form, and psychotropic substances, when the weight is more than Ten times (10 Times) of commercial, then the trial must be expedited."

In relation to the weight of the contraband  to ensure that the trial is not delayed in the categories mentioned above, the Court issued set of nine directions to the  Special and Sessions Court, including the following:

- The laboratories must prioritize the testing. The Director/ Dy Directors of the laboratory where the sample was sent for testing shall be accountable if there is any unusual delay in testing of the sample in the categories mentioned above and forwarding of FSL report, the SSP/Commissioner of Police concerned shall bring it to the notice of the Secretary Home or the Secretary concerned.

- The investigation must be prioritized and completed, and prosecution must be launched as soon as possible, not waiting for the statutory 180 days. Whenever an accused is granted default bail under Section 187 of the BNSS, 2023, the investigative agency must enquire into the non-filing of the police report through an officer of the IPS cadre.

- If the accused in custody is not produced before the trial Court, either physically or through a virtual platform, the reasons for non-production/ non-appearance must be enquired into by an officer of the Deputy Inspector General of Prisons where the accused is in custody in a prison in Punjab or Haryana.

- If the Public Prosecutor or the Counsel representing the prosecution tries to delay the trial, the conduct should be brought to the notice of the concerned Director of Prosecution, or any similarly placed officer.

- If the Trial Judge is of the opinion that the Defence Counsel is intentionally delaying the trial, then, for such an accused, the Legal Aid Counsel should also be appointed in addition to the accused's Counsel.

- If the trial is continuously delayed due to the concerned trial Judge, the concerned Principal Sessions Judge must inform the Administrative Judge/Portfolio Judge.

The development came while dismissing the fourth bail plea of an accused arrested with six kilograms of ICE and 21 kg of heroin.

Repeated Non-Appearance By Co-Accused On Bail Violates Principle Of Parity

The Court pointed out that the repeated non-appearance by those co-accused, who are on bail, reflects a calculated design to obstruct the course of justice and fabricate an artificial semblance of violation of the right of speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

"This is a fake and falsely synthesised right, propounded by the co-accused, who, after securing bail, actively engaged in delaying the trial proceedings, on one pretext or another," it said.

Accused Creating Artificial Ground For Delay 

Raising concern on emerging trend in serious cases, the Court pointed that, "where some of the co- accused, who are on bail, and are accomplices of the gang leader, through a collaborative deceit, engineered by the mafia leaders, engage in dilatory tactics, including non- appearance and seeking unwarranted adjournments to protract the trial, and thereby artificially create a right to bail for those co-accused who are in custody, primarily because they were the main accused and had the lead role as they were the leaders of the mafia."

The Court opined that when these cohorts, operating in syndicates, deliberate non-cooperation with the Trial Court with the ulterior objective of delaying the trial, even a single adjournment, should be seen as an attempt to indirectly augment the claim for bail by an accused who remains in custody.

The judge made it clear that when an under-trial prisoner who artificially delays the trial by devising tactics shall not be entitled to claim bail for the prolonged trial. Justice delayed is justice denied; but when delay is self-engineered, Article 21 becomes a shield of convenience, not a sword of liberty.

Dismissing the plea the Court directed the Registry to send digital copies of this order to all the Sessions Judges/Additional Sessions Judges of the States of Punjab, Haryana, and UT Chandigarh along with the Director General of Police for the State of Haryana, Punjab, and U.T. Chandigarh, to consider internal communications to their officers.

Mr. Lalit Pathak, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Jatin Kundu, AAG, Punjab.

Title: Manjit Singh alias Manna v. State of Punjab

Citation: 2025 LiveLaw (PH) 417

Click here to read order