The Supreme Court has called an order by the Orissa High Court, limiting the period of bail granted to an accused under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act to only two months, as “incorrect”.
A bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and Ujjal Bhuyan opined the high court should have ordered the release of the petitioner if it felt his right to speedy trial was violated.
The court directed that the petitioner shall remain on bail pending further order, while issuing notice to the Odisha government.
Petitioner Kishor Karmakar challenged the validity of the high court order of May 6, 2024. When the matter was called on July 1, no one appeared on his behalf.
However, going by the case file, the bench noted the petitioner has been charged for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(c) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.
He preferred bail application before the high court which took notice of the fact that the petitioner was in custody since May 11, 2022, and only one witness had been examined so far.
In such circumstances, the high court thought fit to order release of the petitioner on bail but only for a period of two months, the court found.
“In our opinion, it is an incorrect order. If the high court was of the view that the right of the petitioner to have a speedy trial could be said to have been infringed, then it should have ordered release of the petitioner on bail pending final disposal of the trial itself. There was no good reason for the high court to limit the period of bail,” the bench said.
Referring to the SC judgment in case of Hussainara Khatoon & Ors. Vs Home Secretary, State of Bihar, Patna (1979), the bench pointed out it is now well settled that the right to a speedy trial is recognised as a fundamental right guaranteed by the Constitution and is closely tied to the right to life and personal liberty.
In its order, the high court’s single-judge bench of Justice Sashikanta Mishra had noted submission of the petitioner that despite being in custody for nearly two years there is no possibility of trial being concluded in near future, which amounts to pre-trial punishment of the petitioner. Of 18 witnesses, only one has been examined so far, the petitioner had said.
“This Court has already taken note of the status of trial as informed by the Court below. Though the quantity of contraband seized is huge, however taking note of the delay in conclusion of the trial, I am inclined to take a lenient view. The bail application is disposed of directing the Court below to release the petitioner on interim bail for a period of two months from the date of his actual release on such terms and conditions as he may deem fit and proper to impose,” the high court had said.
Comments
0 comment