Why in News?

• In Rabi Prakash v. The State of Odisha, Special Leave to Appeal (Crl.) No(s).4169/202 the Supreme Court has stated that an accused cannot be made to remain behind the bars for an indefinite period under the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985 just because the law requires a court’s satisfaction that the person is not guilty.

Background

• In the present case, the Apex Court was considering the bail plea of a man, jailed in Odisha under charges of possessing commercial quantities of narcotics.
• He was facing a minimum of 10 years in jail.
• The accused has already spent three and a half years behind bars and the trial court has recorded the statement of just one witness out of 19 in this time duration.
• The Orissa High Court declined to release him on bail citing the stringent provisions under the NDPS Act.

Court’s Observations

• A bench comprising of Justices Surya Kant and Dipankar Datta has held that liberty of an individual will take precedence over the statutory embargo under the NDPS Act depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case.
• The bench further observed that prolonged incarceration hinders the most precious fundamental right guaranteed under Article 21 of the Indian Constitution. In such a situation, the conditional liberty must override the statutory embargo created by the NDPS Act.
• The Court enlarged the undertrial prisoner on bail.

Legal Provisions

• Undertrial Prisoners - An accused person who is kept in judicial custody during the time their case is being heard in court.

Constitutional and Criminal Law Aspect

• The purpose of the criminal justice system in any country is to protect not only the rights of the victims but also of the convicts, prisoners and undertrials.
• All the persons detained in prison have a right to trial within a reasonable time.
• Prolonged detention and delay in trial cases not only violates the right to liberty guaranteed to people, but also amounts to denial of human rights of the undertrials.
• An undertrial may be warranted in prison on the following grounds:
  • In case of a very grave offence;
  • If the person arrested is likely to interfere with witnesses or impede the course of justice;
  • If the person arrested is likely to commit the same or any other offence;
  • If he may fail to appear for trial.
• The Constitution of India guarantees right to life and personal liberty under Article 21.

Article 21 - Protection of life and personal liberty —No person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law.

Case Law

Sharifbai v. Abdul Razak (1961)

• The Supreme Court in the case of held that if the accused person is not produced before the magistrate within the stipulated time, then such detention will be wrongful.

Hussainara Khatoon v. State of Bihar (1979)

• The Supreme Court gave broader meaning to Article 21 and stated that everyone has the right to a prompt trial.
• The Court held that a procedure which does not make legal services available to an accused person who is too poor to afford a lawyer and who would have to go through the trial without legal assistance cannot be regarded as reasonable, fair and just under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985

• The Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 is a Central legislation to regulate production, consumption and transportation of such harmful substances as specified under the Act.
• The Narcotics Control Bureau was set up under the act with effect from March 1986.
• The Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) is an Indian central law enforcement and intelligence agency under the Ministry of Home Affairs.
• Criminal law follows the maxim actus non facit reum nisi mens sit rea which means that a man shall not be held guilty without guilty intention.
• NDPS Act also requires proven intention or knowledge. In every trial, it is to be looked, whether the alleged offender had the knowledge or intention to commit the offence.

Case Law

• In the case of A.N.Patel v. State of Gujarat (2003) the court stressed upon the fact that NDPS Act cases should be tried as early as possible as in such cases normally accused is not released on bail.