Pranav B Prem

The Gujarat High Court has granted regular bail to a man booked under the NDPS Act, citing his prolonged incarceration of three and a half years and the slow pace of trial, where only two out of 29 witnesses had been examined. Justice Gita Gopi observed that the Special Court had not provided any time-bound schedule for the examination of the remaining witnesses, making it a fit case to exercise discretion in favor of the applicant.

Court’s Observations and Ruling

The court, after reviewing the report from the City Civil Judge, Special Court, noted: “The report of the City Civil Judge, Special Court was called for and the report dated 09.12.2024 shows that there are about 29 witnesses in the matter and two witnesses were examined. The learned Judge has not shown any time-bound schedule of examination of the witnesses. Thus, taking into consideration the long incarceration of the applicant of three and a half years, this Court finds this to be a fit case where discretion could be exercised in favour of the applicant. Hence, the present application is allowed.”

The accused, Mohammad Sadik @ Sajju Mohammad Rafik Gulamnabi Pathan, was arrested in August 2021 in connection with FIR No. 11191011210096 of 2021 registered with D.C.B. Police Station, Ahmedabad City, for offences punishable under Sections 8(C), 22(C), and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act).

Arguments by the Petitioner

The petitioner’s counsel, Advocate Satyam Chhaya, contended that:

1. The accused had been in custody for over three and a half years without significant progress in the trial.

2. Only two out of 29 prosecution witnesses had been examined.

3. The Supreme Court had held in multiple cases that long incarceration violated fundamental rights under Article 21 of the Constitution.

4. Special Courts dealing with NDPS trials were often burdened, leading to delays in individual cases.

Relying on Supreme Court judgments, the counsel argued that prolonged incarceration could override the statutory embargo under Section 37(1)(b) of the NDPS Act in certain circumstances. The judgments referred to included:

1. Rabi Prakash v. State of Odisha

2. Ankur Chaudhary v. State of Madhya Pradesh [SLP (Crl.) No. 4648/2024, dated 28.05.2024]

3. Mohd Muslim @ Hussain v. State (NCT of Delhi) 

4. Kulwinder Singh v. State of Punjab [23.04.2024]

Counterarguments by the Prosecution

The Additional Public Prosecutor, Advocate Utkarsh Sharma, strongly opposed the bail plea, contending:

1. The trial had already commenced, and granting bail at this stage would be inappropriate.

2. No accused should receive special treatment, and equal importance must be given to all parties before the Special Court.

3. The Supreme Court, in X v. State of Rajasthan & Anr. [SLP (Crl.) No. 13378/2024, dated 27.11.2024], held that once a trial begins, bail concessions should be limited.

Final Decision and Conditions of Bail

After considering the arguments, the court granted bail with stringent conditions: “Hence, the present application is allowed. The applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with FIR No.11191011210096 of 2021 registered with D.C.B. Police Station, Ahmedabad City on executing a personal bond of Rs.15,000/- (Rupees Fifteen Thousand only) with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall;”

The conditions imposed were:

1. Not to take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty.

2. Not to act in a manner injurious to the interest of the prosecution.

3. Surrender his passport to the lower court within a week.

4. Not to leave the State of Gujarat without prior permission from the trial court.

5. Furnish his present address to the Investigating Officer and the trial court and not change residence without prior permission.

 

Additionally, the court directed: “If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter.”  The court also ordered the bail bond to be executed before the lower court having jurisdiction over the case and directed the Registry to communicate the order to the concerned court/authority via fax or email immediately.

Cause Title: Mohammad Sadik @ Sajju Mohammad Rafik Gulam NabiPathan vs State of Gujarat

Case No: R/CR.MA/21669/2024

Bench: Justice Gita Gopi

[Read/Download order]