Keeping an accused behind bars for more than six years without the trial even beginning amounts to “punishment in itself”, the Supreme Court has held, terming the state of affairs “unacceptable” and reminding courts that even the rigours of special laws must yield to the constitutional right to personal liberty.
Investigators claimed to have recovered 31kg of opium concealed in plastic bags in the truck. The prosecution alleged that the contraband was in his conscious and constructive possession, while Singh maintained that he was merely driving the vehicle and had no knowledge of the substance allegedly concealed in it. When he approached the court again, he argued, among other things, that the mandatory procedure under Section 52A of the NDPS Act, governing the disposal and documentation of seized narcotic substances, had not been followed.
Singh was arrested by the Narcotics Control Bureau on May 16, 2020, after a truck in which he was travelling was intercepted on GT Road. His first bail application was rejected by the high court in July 2022.
“Keeping an accused incarcerated without trial for more than six years itself amounts to punishment, which is unacceptable,” said a bench of justices Dipankar Datta and Sheel Nagu in a recent order, as it granted bail to a man arrested in a narcotics case.
Court takes note of case
The court noted that the accused, Arshdeep Singh, had been in custody since May 16, 2020, and although charges were recently framed, the trial was yet to commence. It pointed out that in such a case, the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act must yield to Article 21 of the Constitution, which protects the right to personal liberty. Setting aside an Allahabad High Court order from July 28, 2025, which had rejected Singh’s second bail application, the apex court directed his release on bail subject to conditions imposed by the trial court. Section 37 of the NDPS Act imposes stringent twin conditions for granting bail in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotic substances.
It also noted that he had no prior criminal antecedents. Where the prosecution opposes bail, the court must be satisfied that there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty and is unlikely to commit an offence while on bail. The provision is designed to make bail difficult in drug-trafficking cases. However, the Supreme Court’s intervention underscores that these restrictions cannot become a justification for indefinite pre-trial incarceration.
