The Supreme Court on Tuesday ruled that personal liberty cannot supersede national sovereignty, especially in serious offences such as drug trafficking. A bench of Justices Sanjay Karol and N Kotishwar Singh observed that while personal liberty is fundamental, it must take a back seat when pitted against the sovereignty and security of the nation.
Reference to Larger Bench
The court noted that a reference has been made in the case of 'Tasleem Ahmed v. State Govt. of NCT of Delhi' regarding the approach of constitutional courts in bail matters under special statutes, where Article 21, prolonged incarceration, and statutory restrictions intersect. The bench declined to deliberate further on this issue, stating that the paramount consideration is the interest of justice for all.
Conflict Between Sovereignty and Liberty
The bench emphasized, "Should there be any conflict between the sovereignty of country and personal liberty, undoubtedly, the former shall prevail, particularly, when a war is waged against the nation, be it in the form of supply of drugs, which vitally affects the national economy and health of the people."
Bail Cancelled in Drug Case
In a specific case, the Supreme Court cancelled the bail of a person accused of running a drug trafficking network in Punjab, who was caught with nearly 1.5kg of heroin. The court held that incarceration of one year and seven months is not long enough to grant bail, as the accused could face a maximum sentence of 20 years if convicted.
Uniform Application of Prolonged Incarceration
The court highlighted the lack of uniform application of prolonged incarceration as a ground for bail, leading to different outcomes for similarly situated persons. It listed seven cases where bail was granted in some and cancelled in two, with incarceration periods ranging between 2-4 years.
"While this court has recognised on several occasions that prolonged incarceration warrants the grant of bail in view of Article 21 of the Constitution, we have noticed that the application thereof is not uniform. Moreover, there is no doubt that what constitutes 'prolonged incarceration' for the purposes of bail has not been expounded by this court or the law of the land," the bench said.
NDPS Act Requirements
In the present case, the court noted that the accused was caught with a commercial quantity of narcotics, and the mandatory requirements of Section 37 of the NDPS Act must be considered. This section stipulates that bail can be granted only if there are reasonable grounds to believe that the accused is not guilty of the offence.
