Court Upholds Rigorous Bail Conditions Under NDPS Act Despite Petitioner's 11-Month Custody, Citing Seriousness of Offence and Statutory Embargo
In a significant judgment delivered on September 29, 2026, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Justice Sumeet Goel, dismissed the regular bail petition filed by Sunder Singh, the accused in a narcotics case involving the recovery of 109 kilograms and 856 grams of ganja patti. The case, registered under FIR No. 360 dated October 24, 2025, at Police Station Hodal, District Palwal, pertains to offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)(C)/29-61-85 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).
The petitioner, who has been in judicial custody since October 24, 2025, sought bail on grounds of alleged false implication, non-compliance with mandatory NDPS procedural provisions, and delay in trial proceedings. Despite the petitioner's incarceration exceeding 11 months and only three of eighteen prosecution witnesses being examined, the court emphasized that prolonged custody and trial delays do not dilute the stringent bail requirements under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, especially in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotics.
Rejecting the bail plea, the court meticulously referred to binding Supreme Court precedents that reiterate the mandatory nature of Section 37(1)(b)(ii), which requires the court to be satisfied on two cumulative grounds before granting bail in commercial quantity cases: first, that there exist reasonable grounds to believe the accused is not guilty, and second, that the accused is unlikely to commit any offence while on bail. The court found no material before it to satisfy these twin conditions.
The judgment highlighted the gravity and seriousness of the offence, underscored by the substantial quantity of ganja seized - far exceeding the threshold for commercial quantity. The court noted that the petitioner's bald assertions of false implication were unsupported by cogent evidence and that doubts arising from surrounding circumstances must be resolved during trial, not at the bail stage.
Furthermore, the court acknowledged the critical societal concern regarding narcotics trafficking, referencing recent Supreme Court rulings emphasizing the menace of drug abuse in India and the imperative of stringent enforcement measures to curb the drug trade. It recognized the statutory embargo on bail in such cases as a necessary legal mechanism to deter drug trafficking and protect public health and safety.
The court also dismissed the argument that the petitioner's right to a speedy trial and prolonged incarceration warranted bail, clarifying that the constitutional right under Article 21 must be harmoniously construed with the NDPS Act's specific provisions. The judgment reiterated that no relaxation of Section 37's mandatory bail conditions is permissible merely due to delay or custody duration.
In conclusion, the Punjab and Haryana High Court refused the petition for regular bail, directing the petitioner to remain in custody pending trial. The court stressed that this decision should not be construed as an expression of opinion on the merits of the case.
This ruling reaffirms the judiciary's firm stance on narcotics offences involving commercial quantities, underscoring the rigorous statutory safeguards against premature bail and reinforcing the need for stringent judicial oversight in combating the drug menace.
Bottom Line:
NDPS Act - Regular bail in case involving recovery of commercial quantity of contraband - Mere custody of about 11 months and slow progress of trial not sufficient to dilute rigours of Section 37 - Where 109 kg 856 grams ganja patti was recovered, Court held that in absence of material to record satisfaction that accused was not guilty and would not commit offence while on bail, regular bail was liable to be refused.
Statutory provision(s):
Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 Section 37, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 Section 483
Sunder Singh v. State of Haryana, (Punjab And Haryana) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2990607
