© IE Online Media Services Pvt Ltd
Tags:
Journalism of Courage
NDPS Act bail case: The Chhattisgarh High Court, on November 3, directed the trial courts in the state to avoid unnecessary adjournments and fix short and continuous dates for recording evidence.
“All trial courts are directed to make earnest efforts to avoid unnecessary adjournments and to fix short and continuous dates for recording evidence, particularly in cases where the accused is in judicial custody, unless there exists any unavoidable or compelling circumstance”, Chief Justice Ramesh Sinha said.
The court issued this direction while dealing with a bail plea of one Hariom Pal booked under Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985.
The prosecution had alleged seizure of 33.7 kilograms of the contraband substance Ganja from the possession of Pal and the co-accused persons.
The counsel appearing for Pal submitted that he was in jail since November 2024, and out of 14 witnesses, only 3 were examined so far. He further argued that all of them had turned hostile. He further informed the court that the next date fixed for recording their evidence is January 8, 2026.
The court noted that the quantity of contraband seized was much above the commercial quantity. The court further noted that Pal had failed to furnish any satisfactory explanation for the same. The court also observed that the matter could not be a case of false implication, especially when the trial was already in progress.
Thus, the court rejected the bail.
The court, however, directed the trial court to prepone the matter and fix short dates for recording of evidence, considering that he was in custody since November 2024. The court further directed the state police chief (DGP) to ensure the presence of all remaining witnesses before the trial court for expeditious disposal of the trial.
The court expressed hope that the trial court would conclude the trial within four months.
“this Court hopes and trust that the trial Court shall make an earnest endeavour to conclude the trial within a period of four months from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order, if there is no legal impediment”, the court said.
Before parting with the order, the court noted that in several cases trial courts tend to grant long adjournments even where the accused is in custody.
The court said, “Before parting, this Court deems it appropriate to observe that in several cases it has been noticed that the trial Courts tend to grant long adjournments even where the accused is in custody. Such practice not only delays the conclusion of the trial but also adversely affects the fundamental right to speedy trial guaranteed under the Constitution of India.”
The court, therefore, directed the trial courts to avoid unnecessary adjournments and to fix short and continuous dates for recording evidence.
