Court No- 15
THE GUWAHATI HIGH COURT
Bench: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ROBIN PHUKAN
Item no- 03
Bail Appln. / 6784 / 2024
Case Title: SAHEB SAHANI Versus UNION OF INDIA
Case details: This bail application is filled more than one time and court has dismissed it also. Here are some facts of this case.
Facts:
On the first hearing no one appeared for the applicant on call. On the prayer being made by Mr. S. Islam, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. T. Thakuria, learned counsel for the accused, list the matter on 22.08.2024.
Heard Mr. T. Thakuria, learned counsel for the accused and Ms. M. Deka, learned counsel appearing on behalf of Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned Standing counsel for the respondent NCB. This application, under Section 483 of the BNSS is preferred by the accused, namely, Saheb Sahani, who has been languishing in jail hazot in connection with NDPS Case No. 29/2021, arising out of NCB Crime No. 12/2021, under Sections 8(C)/20(b)ii(c) read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act, since 19.06.2021 for grant of bail.
Mr. Thakuria, counsel for the accused, argues for bail on the grounds that this is the second application after the first was dismissed, and that the accused has been in custody for over three years with only one out of nine listed witnesses having been examined. The court has directed the Registry to obtain a scanned copy of the record and an up-to-date status report from the trial Court, and has scheduled the matter for further consideration on 12.09.2024.
Court Observed:
Duration of Custody: The court will consider the length of time the accused has been in custody (over three years) as a significant factor, especially in relation to the pace of the trial.
The court will note that despite the significant time elapsed, only one witness out of nine has been examined. This slow progress could be a key factor in evaluating the necessity of continued detention.
Previous Bail Application: The court will review the reasons for the dismissal of the first bail application and consider whether there have been any significant changes in circumstances that justify a new application.
Held by Court:
Extended Detention: The accused has been in custody for over three years, which is a significant period, particularly if the trial has progressed slowly. This extended detention might raise concerns about whether continued custody is warranted given the delay in the trial.
With only one of nine witnesses examined, there seems to be considerable delay in the trial proceedings. This slow pace could suggest issues with the efficiency of the judicial process or procedural delays.
Second Bail Application: The fact that this is the second bail application, following a dismissal of the first, indicates that the defense is seeking reconsideration of bail due to new or ongoing concerns. This could imply that the circumstances or the case’s progression have changed since the first application.
