Bail in NDPS prosecution granted where continued custody was unnecessary and strict conditions addressed flight risk and investigation concerns.

Bail was granted in an NDPS prosecution where the accused had remained in custody for about 78 days, no contraband was recovered from him, and the prime accused from whom the seizure was made had already obtained statutory bail. The Court found that continued detention was not necessary in the circumstances and that any risk of absconding or interference with the investigation could be managed through strict conditions. On that basis, relief was allowed under Section 439 CrPC, and the accused was ordered to be released on bail subject to safeguards.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner, arraigned as the second accused in an NDPS case, was entitled to bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The petitioner had been in custody for about 78 days, nothing had been seized from him, and the prime accused from whom the contraband was recovered had already been granted statutory bail. The allegations were under the NDPS Act, 1985, but continued detention was found unnecessary in the circumstances. The apprehension that the petitioner might abscond or repeat offences was addressed by imposing strict conditions to secure his presence and prevent interference with the investigation or evidence.

Conclusion: Bail was granted to the petitioner subject to stringent conditions.

Final Conclusion: The petition was allowed, and the petitioner was directed to be released on bail under the stipulated safeguards.

Ratio Decidendi: Where continued custody is not shown to serve a further purpose and adequate safeguards can control flight risk and interference, bail may be granted under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 even in an NDPS prosecution.

---