Hearing required before extending NDPS charge-sheet time under Section 36A(4); ex parte extension was set aside and remitted.

An extension of time to file a charge-sheet under Section 36A(4) of the NDPS Act cannot be sustained if the accused is not afforded a hearing before the application is decided. The Bombay High Court applied the same approach as in an earlier similar matter, holding that the later filing of the charge-sheet did not make the challenge infructuous. It therefore set aside the extension order and remitted the matter to the Special Judge for fresh consideration after hearing both sides, uninfluenced by the earlier bail order.

---

---

Issues: Whether the order extending time to file the charge-sheet under Section 36A(4) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 was liable to be set aside for want of hearing to the accused.

Analysis: The applicant was not heard before the NDPS Court granted extension of time for filing the charge-sheet. In similar facts, the earlier order had set aside such an extension for breach of the requirement of hearing under Section 36A(4), and the same approach was applied here. The later filing of the charge-sheet did not render the challenge ineffective, and the Special Judge was directed to reconsider the extension application afresh after hearing both sides, uninfluenced by the earlier bail order.

Conclusion: The extension order was set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh decision after hearing the applicant and the prosecution.

Ratio Decidendi: An order extending time under Section 36A(4) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 cannot stand where it is made without affording the accused an opportunity of being heard.

---