Speedy trial in NDPS cases can outweigh Section 37 rigours where prolonged custody and trial delay continue.

In NDPS proceedings, prolonged pre-trial incarceration and an unlikely early conclusion of trial can justify regular bail despite the rigours of Section 37. The Court treated the constitutional right to speedy trial under Article 21 as a material consideration, noting that Section 36 of the NDPS Act also reflects the need for expeditious trial. As the accused had remained in custody for about three years, had no other NDPS case against him, and no prosecution witness had been examined despite a large witness list, Section 37 was harmonised with Article 21 and regular bail was granted on conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether regular bail should be granted in a NDPS where the accused had undergone prolonged incarceration and the trial was unlikely to conclude soon, despite the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

Analysis: The petitioner's custody had continued for about three years, with no other NDPS case against him and no prosecution witness examined despite a substantial list of witnesses. The Court treated the right to speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution of India as a material consideration in NDPS cases and noted that Section 36 of the NDPS Act recognises the need for speedy trial. It held that the statutory restrictions under Section 37 could be harmonised with Article 21 where continued pre-trial detention would defeat the constitutional guarantee and the trial was not likely to finish in the near future.

Conclusion: Regular bail was granted to the petitioner, subject to conditions imposed by the trial court and the Court.

---