NDPS bail granted after prolonged custody and slow trial progress, with no delay attributable to the accused.

In NDPS bail matters, prolonged custody, partial progress of trial, and the absence of delay attributable to the accused may justify enlargement on bail where the trial is unlikely to conclude soon. The High Court noted that the petitioner had remained in custody for about 2.5 years, many witnesses were still to be examined, and no material showed that the petitioner caused the delay. Without expressing any view on the merits, the Court held that these circumstances warranted bail at that stage and directed release subject to conditions.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to bail in view of the period of custody, the stage of trial, and the governing considerations under the NDPS bail regime.

Analysis: The petitioner was in custody for about 21/2 years, the trial had progressed only partly, and a substantial number of witnesses still remained to be examined. The Court considered the pace of the trial, the likelihood of its conclusion in the near future, and the applicable bail principles in NDPS matters, while noting that no material showed that the delay was attributable to the petitioner. Without commenting on the merits, the Court found that the circumstances justified enlargement on bail at that stage.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to bail and was ordered to be released on bail subject to the imposed conditions.

---