Courts should exercise caution in granting bail for large Narcotic recoveries

Courts should exercise caution in granting bail for large Narcotic recoveries

In a recent case, an order granting anticipatory bail to a respondent accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act), has been overturned by the Supreme Court of India. Delivered on February 12, 2024, the ruling underscores the Court's emphasis on compliance with legal provisions and the gravity of narcotics-related offenses.

The case in question, originating from an appeal filed by the State Inspector of Police against a Madras High Court decision, revolves around the anticipatory bail granted to B. Ramu. Ramu, the respondent-accused, faced allegations related to the procurement and supply of a substantial quantity of ganja.

The Supreme Court closely scrutinized the High Court's decision to grant anticipatory bail, particularly in the face of opposition from the Public Prosecutor and the significant amount of ganja involved, surpassing the commercial quantity specified in the NDPS Act.

The bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and Sandeep Mehta, delivering the Court's verdict, remarked, "The High Court had not adequately considered the gravity of the offense, the substantial quantity of narcotics involved, and the respondent’s criminal antecedents."

This landmark decision underscores the paramount importance of adhering to legal provisions, with special emphasis on Section 37 of the NDPS Act, which governs bail in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics. Justice Mehta reiterated, "For entertaining a prayer for bail in a case involving the recovery of a commercial quantity of a narcotic drug or psychotropic substance, the Court would have to mandatorily record the satisfaction in terms of the rider contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act."

Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, nullifying the High Court's order that granted anticipatory bail. The respondent-accused, B. Ramu, has been directed to surrender before the trial court within ten days. Additionally, a related special leave petition was dismissed by the Court.

Case: STATE BY THE INSPECTOR OF POLICE vs. B. RAMU,

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(S).  OF 2024 (Arising out of SLP(Crl. ) No(s). 8137 of 2022).

Click to read/download order.

 

Share this News

Website designed, developed and maintained by webexy