Bail granted to HIV-positive accused in NDPS case following voluntary surrender for prior bail跳票.

The applicant was arrested for the alleged possession of 1.5 Kgs of Ganja under Section 20(B) of the NDPS Act.

Though initially granted bail by the Trial Court on April 22, 2020, the applicant subsequently failed to appear, leading to the issuance of three arrest warrants between 2022 and 2025.

The applicant voluntarily surrendered before the Trial Court on January 13, 2026.

Seeking regular bail, the applicant contended he was falsely implicated, the quantity was non-commercial, and he is currently suffering from HIV-positive status as per jail medical reports dated January 28, 2026.

1. Whether the applicant is entitled to regular bail under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023, despite a prior history of absconding during trial.

2. Whether the applicant’s medical condition (HIV positive status) and voluntary surrender constitute sufficient grounds to mitigate the previous breach of bail conditions.

The Court applied Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (BNSS), 2023, regarding the power of the High Court to grant bail.

It also considered Section 20(B) of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985, pertaining to the punishment for contravention in relation to cannabis.

Procedural safeguards were noted under Section 269 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS) for non-appearance, Section 84 of the BNSS for proclamation of absconding persons, and Section 209 of the BNS for non-appearance in response to a court proclamation.

The Court balanced the applicant's prior conduct of absconding against his current circumstances.

It noted that while arrest warrants were issued due to his absence, his voluntary surrender on January 13, 2026, demonstrated a willingness to submit to the judicial process.

The Court took significant note of the medical evidence establishing the applicant’s HIV-positive status, which necessitated a more lenient approach toward incarceration.

Furthermore, the Court observed that the seized quantity (1.5 Kgs of Ganja) was small, and since the trial was expected to prolong, continued detention was unwarranted.

The Court specifically clarified that the trials of the applicant and the still-absconding co-accused (Loman Singh Rajput) should proceed separately to ensure the co-accused's conduct did not prejudice the applicant's right to a timely trial.

The applicant was ordered to be released on furnishing a personal bond with two heavy sureties.

The Court imposed strict conditions, including a prohibition on seeking adjournments during evidence and mandatory presence at key trial stages (framing of charges and recording of statements under Section 351 BNSS).

The Trial Court was directed to expedite and conclude the trial within six months.