Tripura High Court: An application was filed under Section 439(2) read with Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 for cancellation of bail granted to respondent-accused by the Special Judge, Sepahijala District, Sonamura (‘the Special Judge’) vide Order dated 30-01-2024 in a case registered under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25, and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (‘the NDPS Act’). Arindam Lodh, J., opined that the Special Judge had not kept in mind that granting bail to an accused for committing offences under the penal provisions of the NDPS Act was an exception and not a rule. Thus, the order dated 30-01-2024 was quashed and set aside.
Counsel for respondent submitted that the police authorities had mechanically registered the case with an ulterior motive against respondent and that there were some discrepancies in mentioning the dates of recording the Genral Diary (GD) entries where GDE No. 19 was registered on 18-08-2023, but GDE No. 21 was recorded on 08-07-2023. Whereas applicant submitted that records did not reveal anything that there were reasonable grounds to believe that respondent was not guilty of committing the alleged offence and there was no error in mentioning the dates of GD entries as there might be some printing errors.
The Court noted that the dates of GD Entry Nos. 19, 20, and 21, and opined that the printing error was apparent as in GDE No. 21, which was recorded at 1228 hours, the date was mentioned as 08-07-2023 and the entries under GDE No. 21 were dated 18-08-2023. Further, GDE No. 20, which was recorded at 1208 hours, revealed that it was recorded on 18-08-2023.
The Court stated that respondent’s submission that the Special Judge had rightly held that Section 37 of the NDPS Act clearly postulated that an accused could not be kept in custody after filing the charge-sheet, did not deserve to be considered. The Court observed that as per Section 37, to grant bail to an accused arrested for alleged commission of offence under the provisions of the NDPS Act, the Court or the Public Prosecutor must be satisfied that there was reasonable ground to believe that the accused was not guilty of committing the alleged offence. The Court opined that the Special Judge had not kept in mind that granting bail to an accused for committing offences under the penal provisions of the NDPS Act was an exception and not a rule.
The Court relied on Narcotics Control Bureau v. Mohit Aggarwal, 2022 SCC OnLine SC 891, and held that mere filing of charge-sheet was not a ground at all or had no persuasive value to grant bail to an accused of allegedly committing offence under the penal provisions of the NDPS Act. The Court also opined that the materials available on records did not suggest that there were reasonable grounds to believe that respondent was not guilty of committing the alleged offences under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C), 25, 29 of the NDPS Act.
The Court allowed the present application and the order dated 30-01-2024 whereby respondent was granted bail by the Special Judge was quashed and set aside.
[State of Tripura v. Mijanur Rahaman, 2024 SCC OnLine Tri 447, Order dated 20-06-2024]
Advocates who appeared in this case:
For the Applicant: PP Raju Datta
For the Respondent: Advocate S. Ali
Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 HERE
