LexNARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU versus LAKHWINDER SINGH
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 1 S.C.R. 1581 : 2025 INSC 190 Narcotic Control Bureau v. Lakhwinder Singh (Criminal Appeal No. 475 of 2025) 29 January 2025 [Abhay S. Oka* and Ujjal Bhuyan, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court granting relief of suspension of sentence and bail to the respondent/accused pending an appeal against his conviction, under the 1985 Act. Headnotes† Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 – s.37 – Constitution of India – Art.21 – Suspension of sentence and bail, pending appeal against conviction – Power of courts – Conviction of the respondent for offence punishable under the 1985 Act and sentenced to 10 years of rigorous imprisonment – Since the respondent had undergone incarceration for a period of 4 ½ years out of the fixed term sentence of 10 years, and as the appeal was not likely to be heard before the completion of the sentence, the High Court granted relief of suspension of sentence and bail to the respondent – Interference with: Held: Not called for – If a case is made out for the grant of suspension of sentence and/or bail in deserving cases on merits, the Court is not powerless to grant relief of suspension of sentence and bail pending an appeal, even if an accused has not undergone half of the sentence – There cannot be a rule of thumb that a convict cannot be released on bail pending an appeal against conviction unless he has undergone half of substantive sentence – In the case of fixed-term sentences, if the Courts start adopting a rigid approach, in a large number of cases, till the appeal reaches the stage of the final hearing, the accused would undergo the entire sentence – This would be a violation of the rights of the accused * Author 1582 [2025] 1 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports u/Art.21 and would defeat the right of appeal – Furthermore, the Appellate Court is bound by constraints of s.37 while considering the prayer for the grant of bail during the pendency of an appeal – However, if an accused has undergone a substantial part of the substantive sentence and, considering the pendency of criminal appeals, his appeal is not likely to be heard before the accused undergoes the entire sentence, the appellate court can exercise the power of releasing the accused on bail pending the appeal. [Paras 5-8] Case Law Cited Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee representing Undertrial Prisoners v. Union of India & Ors. [1994] Supp. 4 SCR 386 : (1994) 6 SCC 731; Dadu v. State of Maharashtra [2000] Supp. 3 SCR 703 : (2000) 8 SCC 437 – referred to. List of Acts Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985; Constitution of India. List of Keywords Suspension of sentence; Suspension of sentence pending appeal; Violation of Article 21; Bail; Fixed-term sentences; Substantial part of substantive sentence; Appeal not likely to be heard before accused undergoes entire sentence. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 475 of 2025 From the Judgment and Order dated 08.03.2021 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh in CRM No. 1175 of 2021 Appearances for Parties Suryaprakash V. Raju, A.S.G., Ms. Sairica Raju, Rajan Kr. Chourasia, Annam Venkatesh, Arvind Kumar Sharma, Advs. for the Appellant. Akshay Verma, Ms. Sushma Verma, Abhinav Singh, Advs. for the Respondent. [2025] 1 S.C.R. 1583 Narcotic Control Bureau v. Lakhwinder Singh Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment Abhay S. Oka, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. Heard Shri S.V. Raju, learned ASG appearing for the appellant. 3. By the impugned order, the High Court has granted relief of suspension of sentence and bail to the respondent/accused pending an appeal against the conviction. The respondent was convicted for an offence punishable under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, “the NDPS Act”). The substantive sentence of the respondent is 10 years of rigorous imprisonment. In the appeal of the year 2021, the High Court noted that the respondent had undergone incarceration for a period of 4 ½ years out of the fixed term sentence of 10 years. As the appeal was not likely to be heard before the completion of the sentence, the High Court granted relief of suspension of sentence and bail to the respondent. 4. The learned ASG relies upon a decision of this Court in the case of the Supreme Court Legal Aid Committee representing Undertrial Prisoners vs. Union of In
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.