Supreme Court Grants Bail to NCB Officer Accused in a Narco-Terror case

New Delhi: The Supreme Court has granted bail to an officer of the Narcotics Control Bureau (NCB) recently , who has been in custody since March 1, 2021, facing serious charges under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (NDPS Act), the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA), and various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC).
A bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka & Justice Ujwal Bhuyyan observed that the trial has made minimal progress, with only six witnesses examined to date. The court noted that the trial is unlikely to conclude within a reasonable timeframe. Furthermore, no prior criminal antecedents of the appellant were presented by the prosecution.
The appellant’s legal team, comprising Sr. Adv. Shadan Farasat, Adv. Umair A. Andrabi, Adv. Tanisha, both from Jammu and Kashmir , and others argued that the evidence against their client was insufficient to justify continued incarceration.
The Supreme Court also expressed concerns over the investigative methods, particularly the reliance on a photo identification memo where witnesses were shown photographs of the appellant rather than participating in a proper Test Identification Parade (TIP). The bench remarked that this was a “very strange and doubtful procedure,” though it refrained from making final findings to avoid influencing the ongoing trial.
The prosecution’s claim of recovering ₹91 lakh from the appellant was also scrutinized, with the court noting that no evidence was presented to link the money directly to the alleged offences.
Applying the legal principles established in the judgment of the Supreme Court in K.A. Najeeb, the court concluded that the prolonged trial and lack of compelling evidence warranted the appellant’s release on bail. The court directed that the appellant be produced before the trial court within a week to finalize the bail conditions.
Earlier also in the same case in November 2024, the Supreme Court had expressed concern over the trend of High Courts denying bail while at the same time giving directions to trial courts to speed up trial as a consolation to the accused.
The bench had described this situation as “shocking.” This practice has led to situations where accused individuals remain in custody for extended periods, the Court lamented.
“There is new practice going on by High courts where they deny bail but give solace to lawyers by directing trial to be completed expeditiously. Accused is behind for three years and seven months. These are shocking affairs going on,” Court had orally observed.