LI Network
Published on: December 02, 2023 at 17:30 IST
The Delhi High Court emphasized that a mere delay in complying with the procedures outlined in Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) does not constitute sufficient grounds for granting bail.
Justice Amit Bansal stated that while prompt adherence to the procedures is desirable, the petitioner must demonstrate specific prejudice resulting from the delayed compliance with Section 52A.
Section 52A of the NDPS Act mandates that, upon the seizure of psychotropic substances, the concerned officer must approach the Magistrate for the supervised and certified conduct of the sampling process.
The court’s observation came in response to a bail plea filed by an individual who argued that there was an unjustifiable delay in adhering to the prescribed procedure under Section 52A, without any explanation provided by the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB).
The NCB countered the plea, asserting the direct involvement of the accused in procuring and dispatching a commercial quantity of psychotropic substances, with recoveries made from both his residence and the Foreign Post Office.
The NCB contended that there was complete compliance with Section 52A, and the required samples were drawn in the presence of the accused before the Magistrate.
Justice Bansal, while dismissing the bail application, underscored that the petitioner failed to establish any prejudice resulting from the delayed compliance with Section 52A.
The court maintained that it could not prima facie conclude that the accused was innocent or that releasing him on bail would not lead to similar offenses.
Consequently, the court found that the conditions outlined in Section 37 of the NDPS Act were not met, and bail could not be granted at this stage.
In conclusion, the court dismissed the petitioner’s application, emphasizing the necessity for the applicant to demonstrate a tangible adverse impact due to the delay in complying with Section 52A.