Court Cites Flight Risk and Non-Compliance with NDPS Act's Stringent Bail Conditions
In a significant ruling, the Delhi High Court has denied bail to Lydia Kabukazi Aloyo, a Ugandan national, who was apprehended for trafficking heroin into India. The Court's decision underscores the stringent compliance required under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, particularly Section 37, which governs bail conditions for cases involving commercial quantities of contraband.
The case dates back to April 10, 2022, when Aloyo was intercepted at the Indira Gandhi International Airport in New Delhi upon her arrival from Sharjah. Customs officials, acting on suspicion, detained her for further verification. Despite no contraband being initially detected, Aloyo admitted to having ingested capsules containing narcotic substances. Subsequent medical examination at Dr. Ram Manohar Lohia Hospital led to the recovery of 42 capsules containing heroin, totaling approximately 462 grams, classified as a commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
The petitioner's bail plea was earlier rejected by the Special Judge (NDPS) at Dwarka Courts, citing the statutory embargo under Section 37 of the NDPS Act. Aloyo's counsel argued that her detention violated procedural safeguards, particularly concerning the Customs Act and NDPS Act's provisions, and contended that her prolonged hospital stay constituted unauthorized detention. The defense also highlighted her lack of prior criminal history and prolonged incarceration of over 3½ years.
However, the High Court, presided by Justice Ravinder Dudeja, emphasized that procedural irregularities alleged by the defense are matters for trial and do not entitle the petitioner to bail. The Court noted that Aloyo's voluntary admission to possessing contraband negated the necessity for magistrate orders for body screening under Section 103 of the Customs Act. Furthermore, the Court held that procedural lapses in sampling and non-compliance with Section 52A NDPS Act were not sufficient grounds for bail, referencing the Supreme Court's stance in similar cases.
The judgment highlighted the gravity of the offense, pointing out that the commercial quantity of contraband involved attracts severe penalties under the NDPS Act. The Court stressed the mandatory twin conditions under Section 37, requiring reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty and not likely to commit an offense while on bail, were not met.
Given Aloyo's foreign nationality, the Court deemed her a flight risk, further justifying the denial of bail. The ruling also directed the trial court to expedite proceedings, with 14 out of 32 witnesses already examined.
This decision reinforces the judiciary's stringent stance on drug trafficking cases, especially those involving foreign nationals and commercial quantities of narcotics, underlining the legal framework's focus on curbing the drug menace.
Bottom Line:
Bail application under Section 483 BNSS, 2023 read with Section 439 CrPC involving commercial quantity of contraband under NDPS Act, 1985. Court emphasized stringent compliance of Section 37 NDPS Act and denied bail citing prima facie evidence of conscious possession and flight risk due to petitioner being a foreign national.
Statutory provision(s): Section 37 NDPS Act, 1985, Section 52A NDPS Act, 1985, Section 103 Customs Act, 1962, Article 21 Constitution of India, 1950, Section 483 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, Section 439 CrPC
Lydia Kabukazi Aloyo v. Customs, (Delhi) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2827118
