Prolonged trial delay can justify regular bail under the NDPS Act despite Section 37 where custody is extended and liberty was not misused.

Prolonged incarceration and an inordinately delayed NDPS trial can outweigh the Section 37 bail restriction where the accused has not misused earlier interim liberty and the trial is unlikely to conclude soon. The Delhi HC noted that the petitioner had been in custody since August 2015, only 17 of 53 prosecution witnesses had been examined over about nine years, and further delay was likely. On those facts, the Court concluded that the petitioner was entitled to regular bail notwithstanding the statutory rigours of the NDPS Act.

---

---

Issues: Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail in view of prolonged incarceration and delay in trial despite the rigours of Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.

Analysis: The petitioner had remained in custody since 20 August 2015, and only 17 out of 53 prosecution witnesses had been examined over about nine years. The trial was likely to take considerable time. The petitioner had earlier been granted interim bail and had not breached the conditions imposed. In these circumstances, the delay in conclusion of the trial outweighed the statutory restriction on bail.

Conclusion: The petitioner was entitled to regular bail.

Ratio Decidendi: Undue delay in trial and prolonged incarceration can justify grant of bail under the NDPS Act notwithstanding Section 37, where the accused has not misused prior interim liberty and the trial is unlikely to conclude soon.

---