Prolonged custody can justify bail in NDPS cases when trial delay threatens personal liberty under Article 21.

In an NDPS prosecution, prolonged custody and the slow pace of trial justified bail despite Section 37 restrictions. The Court noted that the accused had spent more than three and a half years in custody, only one of nineteen witnesses had been examined, and the trial would take further time. While the twin conditions under Section 37 were considered, the second condition could not be conclusively determined at that stage. The Court held that extended incarceration undermines the protection of personal liberty under Article 21, and granted bail subject to bail bonds, two local sureties, and appearance before the Trial Court on each hearing date.

---

---

Issues: Whether bail could be granted in an offence under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 despite the restrictions under Section 37, in view of prolonged custody and the stage of trial, and whether additional safeguards were necessary.

Analysis: The petitioner had remained in custody for more than three and a half years, the trial had commenced but only one of the nineteen witnesses had been examined, and the trial was likely to take further time. The Court considered the twin conditions under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, and noted that while the State had been heard on those conditions, the second condition could not be conclusively addressed at that stage. It held that prolonged incarceration militates against the protection of personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India and that conditional liberty may override the statutory embargo in the circumstances.

Conclusion: Bail was granted, subject to furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Trial Court, producing two local sureties, and appearing before the Trial Court on each date of hearing.

---