Mere Delayed Compliance Of Section 52A NDPS Act No Ground For Bail: Delhi High Court

The Delhi High Court has said that though it is desirable that the procedure contemplated in Section 52A of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, must be complied with at the earliest, mere delayed compliance of the same cannot be a ground for grant of bail.

“The applicant will have to show the prejudice caused on account of delayed compliance of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act,” Justice Amit Bansal observed.

Section 52A provides that upon seizure of psychotropic substances, the officer shall approach the Magistrate, under whose presence and supervision the process of sampling will be conducted and certified to be correct.

The court made the observation while dismissing the bail plea moved by a man who claimed that there was an inordinate delay in compliance of the procedure prescribed under Section 52A of the NDPS Act and that no explanation was given on behalf of the NCB for the same.

On the other hand, the NCB contended that the accused was directly involved in procuring and sending commercial quantity of psychotropic substances along with other co- accused persons and that recoveries were made from his apartment as well as from the Foreign Post Office, ITO, pursuant to the disclosure made by him.

It was also submitted that there was full compliance of the requirements under Section 52A of the NDPS Act and samples were drawn before the Magistrate in the presence of the accused persons.

Rejecting the bail plea, Justice Bansal said that sampling of the seized psychotropic substances was carried out in the presence of the Magistrate and accused persons, and the samples were directed to be sent for testing.

“The applicant has failed to show the prejudice caused to him on account of the delayed compliance of Section 52-A of the NDPS Act,” the court said.

It added that it was not possible to form a prima facie view that the accused was not guilty of the offences or that he would not commit similar offences if released on bail.

“Therefore, the twin conditions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act are not satisfied and bail cannot be granted to the applicant at this stage. Accordingly, the present application is dismissed,” the court said.

Counsels for Petitioner: Advocates Pritish Sabharwal and Sharad Pandey

Counsels for Respondent: Senior Standing Counsel Subhash Bansal with Advocate Raghav Bansal

Case Title: SOMDUTT SINGH @ SHIVAM v. NARCOTICS CONTROL BUREAU

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (Del) 1204

Click Here To Read/Download Order