Excelsior Correspondent
JAMMU, Mar 3: The High Court of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh has dismissed the bail application of one Angrez Singh in a commercial quantity NDPS case, observing that the trial is progressing and nearing conclusion, and the record does not reveal any “inordinate delay” warranting relaxation of the statutory bar under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Pronouncing the order, Justice Sanjay Parihar noted that the petitioner is an accused in FIR No. 26/2020 registered at Police Station ANTF, Jammu under Sections 8/20/29 of the NDPS Act, in which the trial court had earlier rejected bail on July 9, 2025 in view of the alleged recovery of 32 kg charas (commercial quantity) and the failure to satisfy the twin conditions required under Section 37.
The petitioner, who was arrested on July 14, 2020, argued that continued incarceration for more than five years violates the right to speedy trial under Article 21, and sought bail primarily on the ground of delay in conclusion of trial. He relied upon Supreme Court decisions including Mohd Muslim Versus State (NCT of Delhi), Dheeraj Kumar Shukla Versus State of Uttar Pradesh and Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee Versus Union of India, contending that prolonged incarceration and stagnation of trial can justify bail despite statutory restrictions.
The petitioner was represented by Advocate Idrees Saleem Dar while the UT was represented by Dy AG Pawan Dev Singh.
However, the High Court pointed out that the charge-sheet was filed on Feb 5, 2021, charges were framed on Aug 24, 2021, and 15 out of 23 prosecution witnesses have already been examined, indicating that proceedings are moving forward in a structured manner.
On the plea seeking benefit of Section 436-A CrPC, the court held that the offence alleged carries a maximum punishment of 20 years, and the petitioner has not completed one-half of the maximum term to attract the statutory mandate; besides, the provision does not operate as an absolute command where special enactments like the NDPS Act impose additional bail conditions.
The court further observed that there was no material to show that the prosecution was remiss or that the proceedings had stagnated without justification; therefore, mere passage of time cannot, by itself, dilute the embargo under Section 37 when the trial is nearing conclusion.
Accordingly, the bail application was dismissed. At the same time, considering the custody already undergone, the High Court directed the trial court to accord priority to the case and make earnest efforts to conclude the trial expeditiously, preferably within a fixed timeframe, subject to cooperation of the parties.
The post HC denies bail to NDPS accused appeared first on Daily Excelsior.