Allahabad High Court
Malikhan Singh Alias Malkhan Singh vs Union Of India on 5 August, 2025
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:131485 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC. BAIL APPLICATION No. - 37611 of 2023 Applicant :- Malikhan Singh Alias Malkhan Singh Opposite Party :- Union of India Counsel for Applicant :- Amarnath Tiwari,Ramendra Nath Tiwari Counsel for Opposite Party :- Ashish Pandey Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J.
1. Heard Sri Amarnath Tiwari, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Bipul Pandey, learned Advocate holding brief of Sri Ashish Pandey, learned counsel for NCB for the State.
2. The instant bail application has been filed seeking release of the applicant on bail in Case Crime No. 18 of 2021, Special Sessions Trial No. 24 of 2021, under Sections 8(C)/20/29 N.D.P.S. Act, Police Station NCB Lucknow pertaining to an occurrence within the limits of Police Station Salempur, District Deoria during pendency of the trial.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits, this is second bail application filed on behalf of applicant and first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court on merit after considering the fact that from the Truck in which, applicant and two others were sitting 200 Kgs. Ganja was recovered but he is pressing the instant second bail application solely on the ground that in the present matter applicant is in jail since 26.04.2021 i.e. for last more than four years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded.
4. He further submits, however, after producing three witnesses N.C.B. moved an application, not to produce any other witness but the application moved by N.C.B. has been dismissed by the trial court and after that dates are being fixed for evidence of prosecution witnesses but till date no statement of witnesses could be recorded after the statement of P.W.-3 and therefore, trial of the case is moving with languid pace and there is no hope of early disposal. He further submits, there is no evidence on record which can suggests that applicant is causing delay in trial.
5. He further submits, law is settled that even in cases of N.D.P.S. Act on the ground of long incarceration an accused can be released on bail. He placed reliance on the judgment of the Apex Court in the case Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain Vs. State (NCT of Delhi) AIR 2023 SC 225.
6. He further submits, applicant is not having any criminal history.
7. Per contra, learned counsel appearing on behalf of N.C.B. opposed the prayer for bail and submitted that from the possession of applicant and two others huge quantity of Ganja was recovered and after considering this fact, first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed but he could not dispute the fact that applicant is in jail since 26.04.2021 i.e. for last more than four years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded and even till today dates are being fixed for prosecution evidence. He further could not dispute the fact that applicant is not having any criminal history.
8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record of the case.
9. This is the second bail application filed on behalf of the applicant and first bail application of the applicant has been dismissed by this Court after considering the fact that from the possession of applicant and two others 200 Kgs. Ganja was recovered but it reflects, applicant is in jail in the present matter since 26.04.2021 i.e. for last more than four years and till date trial of the case could not be concluded.
10. Considering the long incarceration of applicant, a report was called from the court concerned which is on record and from its perusal it reflects, dates are being fixed for prosecution evidence.
11. Further, from the record it could not be reflected that applicant caused any delay in trial. Further, learned counsel appearing on behalf of N.C.B. also could not placed any material on the basis of which this Court can infer that applicant is responsible for delay in trial.
12. Further, however, present case relates to provisions of N.D.P.S. Act but the Apex Court in the case of Mohd. Muslim @ Hussain (supra) on which reliance was placed by learned counsel for applicant categorically dealt with the issue and observed that non obstante clause of Section 37 of N.D.P.S. Act does not create any bar to this Court to release the accused on bail after considering his long incarceration, therefore, considering the long incarceration, even in cases of N.D.P.S. Act an accused can be released on bail.
13. Further, three judges Bench of the Apex Court in the case of Union of India Vs. K.A. Najeeb (2021) 3 SCC 713 held that right of speedy trial is a fundamental right of an accused and on its violation he can be released on bail.
14. Further, the Apex Court in the cases of Javed Gulam Nabi Shaikh Vs. State of Maharashtra and another (2024) 9 SCC 813 and Sheikh Javed Iqbal @ Ashfaq Ansari @ Javed Ansari Vs. State of U.P. 2024 (2024) 8 SCC 293 has observed that an accused who is in jail since long and there is no material to show that he is responsible for delay in trial then it cannot be said that his fundamental right of speedy trial has not been violated and considering this fact even in serious cases he can be released on bail.
15. Further, applicant is not having any criminal history.
16. Therefore, considering the facts and circumstances and long incarceration of the applicant, in my view, applicant is entitled to be released on bail.
17. Accordingly, without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the instant bail application is allowed.
18. Let the applicant - Malikhan Singh @ Malkhan Singh be released on bail in the aforesaid case on furnishing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned with the following conditions:-
(i) The applicant shall appear before the trial court on the dates fixed, unless his personal presence is exempted.
(ii) The applicant shall not directly or indirectly, make inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the Court or any police officer or tamper with the evidence.
(iii) The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal and anti-social activity.
19. In case of breach of any of the above condition, the prosecution will be at liberty to move an application before this Court for cancellation of the bail of the applicant.
20. It is clarified that the observations made herein are limited to the facts brought in by the parties pertaining to the disposal of bail application and the said observations shall have no bearing on the merits of the case during trial.
Order Date :- 5.8.2025 AK Pandey