The Chhattisgarh High Court has directed all trial courts to avoid granting long adjournments in cases registered under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act and to ensure that hearings are held on short and continuous dates, particularly when the accused is in judicial custody. The Court made these observations while hearing a bail application filed by an accused who had been in custody since November 2024. The case involved fourteen prosecution witnesses, out of which only three had been examined, and the next date for further examination had been fixed nearly two months later. The Court took serious note of this delay, terming it inconsistent with the right to a speedy trial, which is a fundamental component of Article 21 of the Constitution.
The bench expressed concern that in several NDPS cases, trial courts tend to grant extended adjournments even when the accused is incarcerated. Such practices, the Court observed, undermine the constitutional right to a fair and expeditious trial and result in unnecessary prolongation of custody. The High Court highlighted that the gravity of NDPS offences and the severity of the punishment make it imperative for the prosecution and the judiciary to conduct trials efficiently, without procedural laxity or administrative indifference.
In its order, the High Court directed the trial court to advance the hearing dates and ensure that proceedings are conducted in close succession so that the trial could be concluded within four months from the date of receipt of the certified copy of the order, subject to unavoidable legal contingencies. The Court further instructed the Director General of Police to take necessary steps to ensure that all remaining prosecution witnesses are made available before the trial court promptly, to prevent any delay in recording evidence.
The bench observed that the purpose of the NDPS Act is not only punitive but also preventive, and delays in prosecution defeat both objectives. It noted that prolonged incarceration without trial adversely affects the morale and rights of the accused and leads to a backlog of pending cases. The Court reiterated that every accused person, regardless of the gravity of the charge, is entitled to a speedy trial, and that judicial and administrative efficiency must align to guarantee that right.
The judgment serves as a directive to all trial courts in the state to adopt a more disciplined and structured approach to case management. It reinforces the need for coordination between the judiciary, police, and prosecution to ensure that witnesses are available and evidence is presented without undue delay. The ruling stands as a reaffirmation of the constitutional mandate for speedy justice and seeks to strike a balance between effective law enforcement and the protection of individual liberties under the criminal justice system.
0 Comments
Thank you for your response. It will help us to improve in the future.