1992 CrLJ 399
Bombay High Court
Lawrance D Souzo
Versus
State of Maharashtra and another
Decided On:
Act Referred :NARCOTIC DRUGS AND PSYCHOTROPIC SUBSTANCES ACT : S.37
Section 37-Bail-Provisions of Sections 41 to 58 of Act would be application right from inception of investigation Hence question of noncompliance with procedural requirements must be insisted upon and must be shown prima facie at stage of bail.
The provisions of Section 41 to 58 would be applicable right from the inception of the investigation. It would he fallacious and pernicious to leave the question of their compliance to be looked into only at the stage of trial. Such a situation is fraught with the danger of the prosecution agency ignoring altogether the compliance of the provisions which contain in-built safeguards to the accused, with impunity and with ulterior purpose in a given case. That would bring into peril the liberty of the citizen guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The accused therefore should be entitled to rely upon the infirmities with all its rigour even at the stage of bail. The consequences of a person being trapped in a Narcotic Case are indeed serious and rave. There are stringent limitations on grant of bail under Section 37 of the Act Courts must therefore be vigilant to protect the rights of the accused. There can be no quarrel that an offender under the Act must be apprehended and severely punished, provided however, that he is found guilty. That possibility bas to be found to exist at the stage of bail on prima facie consideration of the matter and only after reaching satisfaction that be is reasonably believed to be guilty. For that purpose, the compliance with procedural requirements must be insisted upon and must be shown, at least, prima facie at the stage of bail.
For Citation : 1992 Cri LJ 399 at pp. 402, 403 (Bom
The provisions of Section 41 to 58 would be applicable right from the inception of the investigation. It would he fallacious and pernicious to leave the question of their compliance to be looked into only at the stage of trial. Such a situation is fraught with the danger of the prosecution agency ignoring altogether the compliance of the provisions which contain in-built safeguards to the accused, with impunity and with ulterior purpose in a given case. That would bring into peril the liberty of the citizen guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution. The accused therefore should be entitled to rely upon the infirmities with all its rigour even at the stage of bail. The consequences of a person being trapped in a Narcotic Case are indeed serious and rave. There are stringent limitations on grant of bail under Section 37 of the Act Courts must therefore be vigilant to protect the rights of the accused. There can be no quarrel that an offender under the Act must be apprehended and severely punished, provided however, that he is found guilty. That possibility bas to be found to exist at the stage of bail on prima facie consideration of the matter and only after reaching satisfaction that be is reasonably believed to be guilty. For that purpose, the compliance with procedural requirements must be insisted upon and must be shown, at least, prima facie at the stage of bail.
For Citation : 1992 Cri LJ 399 at pp. 402, 403 (Bom