Case Title: Chinedu Patrick vs. Narcotics Control Bureau
Date of Decision: September 4, 2023
Case Number: Bail Appln. 3494/2021
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Vikas Mahajan
Factual Background
The prosecution alleged that a parcel destined for New Zealand, containing nebulizers, was suspected to conceal narcotic drugs or psychotropic substances. This parcel was intercepted at DHL Express, Rama Road, Kirti Nagar, New Delhi. Upon searching the parcel, 390 grams of Amphetamine, a psychotropic substance in a commercial quantity, was found. The parcel was booked in the name of Vinay Kumar Ray as the consignor and M/s. Sarah Eaglestor as the consignee.
Legal Issues
- Whether there is sufficient evidence to link the petitioner, Chinedu Patrick, to the seized contraband?
- Whether the statement of co-accused Kenneth Adams, recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, is admissible as evidence against the petitioner?
- Should bail be granted considering the petitioner’s long period of incarceration and the delay in the trial?
Contentions
- The petitioner’s counsel argued that there was no direct evidence linking Chinedu Patrick to the seized contraband.
- The petitioner’s statement recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act did not implicate him in any illegal activity.
- The recovery of contraband from the parcel booked on behalf of Dalini Singh did not involve the petitioner.
- The prosecution’s case primarily relied on the statement of Kenneth Adams, which was inadmissible.
- The petitioner had been in custody since April 6, 2019, and the trial was progressing slowly.
Observation and Analysis
The court observed that the evidence presented against the petitioner was circumstantial. The statement of co-accused Kenneth Adams, recorded under Section 67 of the NDPS Act, was held to be inadmissible by the Supreme Court. WhatsApp chats retrieved from the petitioner’s mobile did not directly connect him to the seized contraband. The court also noted that the recovery of heroin from Kenneth Adams, albeit an intermediate quantity, did not establish a direct link to the petitioner. The rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act did not apply in this case due to the lack of evidence linking the petitioner to the seized contraband.
Decision of the Court
The court granted regular bail to the petitioner, Chinedu Patrick, based on the following considerations:
- There was no material linking the petitioner to the commercial quantity of contraband seized from the parcel allegedly booked on behalf of Dalini Singh.
- The recovery of 70 gms. of heroin from Kenneth Adams, while an intermediate quantity, was also not linked to the petitioner, except for Kenneth Adams’ statement.
- The statement of Kenneth Adams was held to be inadmissible as evidence based on the Supreme Court’s decision in Toofan Singh vs. State of Tamil Nadu.
- The court emphasized that the prolonged incarceration of undertrial prisoners violated constitutional principles of dignity and liberty.
The court granted regular bail to Chinedu Patrick, subject to certain conditions. These conditions included:
- Furnishing a valid visa (if obtained), not leaving the country without court permission;
- Depositing the passport with the court (if obtained);
- Providing a working mobile phone number to the Investigating Officer;
- Marking weekly attendance with the police, appearing before the trial court as required;
- Not leaving the NCT of Delhi without court permission, and;
- Refraining from criminal activities during the bail period.
The court considered the petitioner’s prolonged incarceration and the slow progress of the trial in making this decision.
“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”
Written by – Ananya Chaudhary
