Allowed¶27

Rifat Ali @ Danish v. State NCT of Delhi

NDPS bail – delay in trial

Delhi HC13 May 2026BAIL APPLN./1258/2026

Download

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Regular bail granted by High Court of Delhi (Justice Girish Kathpalia, 13.05.2026) in BAIL APPLN. 1258/2026 for Rifat Ali @ Danish, FIR No. 667/2023 P.S. Bhalswa Dairy, Sections 21/25/29 NDPS Act, heroin recovery 300 grams, custody since 18.07.2023, speedy trial Article 21 vs Section 37 NDPS Act, trial delay, unidentified investigating officer, unbriefed APP, personal bond Rs. 10,000/-, order copied to Commissioner of Police.

What did the court decide?

Regular bail granted; accused/applicant to be released on furnishing personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court; copy of order to be sent to Jail Superintendent for conveyance to the accused and to the Commissioner of Police for information and necessary action; accompanying application disposed of. ¶27

Rifat Ali @ Danish Vs State NCT of Delhi — Narcotics (NDPS) | Delhi HC (2026)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

¶27

Issue for consideration

Whether the accused/applicant is entitled to regular bail in FIR No. 667/2023 of Police Station Bhalswa Dairy for offence under Section 21/25/29 NDPS Act. +1 more

¶10

Court's answer

Given the conduct of the prosecution side (unidentified IO, unbriefed APP, slow trial progress), it does not appear that the trial would be concluded within reasonable time, warranting bail.

¶25

Ratio / Principle

Right to speedy trial flowing from Article 21 of the Constitution of India is potent enough to make inroads into the rigours of Section 37 of NDPS Act.

¶25

Key takeaways

The bail application is allowed; the accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to furnishing a personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.ratio¶27
General criticism of the State/police approach: the role of the police is not just to arrest a person and detain them without pursuing the prosecution; this is not the manner in which the State should deal with the liberty of an individual.obiter¶18

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

NDPS bail - delay in trial - right to speedy trial under Article 21 held potent enough to make inroads into rigours of Section 37 NDPS Act. Accused in custody since 18.07.2023 in FIR No. 667/2023 (P.S. Bhalswa Dairy, Sections 21/25/29 NDPS Act; alleged recovery of 300 gms heroin from car boot); trial stalled (four witnesses fully examined, fifth partly examined), investigating officer unidentified after retirement of prior IO and APP unbriefed. Court found trial unlikely to conclude within reasonable time, criticised the State's handling of liberty, and allowed regular bail on personal bond of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety; copies of order sent to Jail Superintendent and Commissioner of Police.

¶1

$~1

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 13.05.2026

¶4

- BAIL APPLN. 1258/2026 & CRL.M.A. 9891/2026

¶5

RIFAT ALI @ DANISH .....Petitioner

¶6

Through: Mr. Karan Verma, Advocate.

¶7

versus STATE NCT OF DELHI .....Respondent Through: Mr. Yudhvir Singh Chauhan, APP for State with Sub Inspectors Sohan Thakur and Tej Singh.

¶8

CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA

¶9

J U D G M E N T (ORAL)

¶10

The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in case FIR No. 667/2023 of Police Station Bhalswa Dairy for offence under Section 21/25/29 NDPS Act.

¶11

Despite repeated directions across various judicial orders, approach of the Delhi Police towards bail issues has not changed. In this matter also, there is no clarity as to who is the investigating officer or to whom the trial was assigned. Two Sub Inspectors namely Sohan Thakur and Tej Singh have appeared, but both of them submit that they are not the Sub Inspector

¶12

BAIL APPLN. 1258/2026 Page 1 of 3 pages

¶13

GIRISH Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF KATHPALIA DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.05.13 05:33:09 +05'30'

¶14

Signature Not Verified

¶15

Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Da te:1 3.05.2026 17:42:21

¶16

to whom this case was assigned after retirement of the IO/SI Narender. Neither of them is aware as to who has been assigned this case. Consequently, the learned APP also has not been briefed at all.

¶17

Further, according to learned counsel for accused/applicant, only five witnesses have been examined in trial so far, with the fifth one only partly examined before the trial court. But according to learned APP, six witnesses have been examined by the trial court, as instructed to him by SI Sohan Thakur present in courtroom. Learned counsel for accused/applicant has placed before me copies of ordersheets of the trial court according to which only four witnesses have been completely examined and fifth witness has only been chief examined and his cross examination is now listed on 15.05.2026. The delay in trial is the major plank on which the accused/applicant seeks grant of bail in this case.

¶18

This is certainly not the manner in which the State should deal with the liberty of an individual. Role of the police is not just to arrest a person and dump them in jail, without bothering to pursue the prosecution.

¶19

So far as the present case is concerned, the allegation against the accused/applicant is that from the boot of his car, 300 grams heroin was recovered on 18.07.2023 in Barielly, U.P.

¶20

Since 18.07.2023, the accused/applicant is in jail. Looking into the

¶21

BAIL APPLN. 1258/2026

¶22

Page 2 of 3 pages

¶23

GIRISH KATHPALIA Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.05.13 05:32:55 +05'30'

¶24

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Da te:1 3.05.2026 17:42:21

¶25

conduct of prosecution side as described above, it does not appear that the trial would be concluded within reasonable time. It is trite that right to speedy trial flowing from Article 21 of the Constitution of India is potent enough to make inroads into the rigours of Section 37 of NDPS Act.

¶26

Therefore, the bail application is allowed and the accused/applicant is directed to be released on bail subject to his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 10,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court.

¶27

Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for being conveyed to the accused/applicant.

¶28

Copy of this order be also sent to the Commissioner of Police for information and necessary action with the ever fainting hope that they would start taking issues of liberty in a serious manner .

¶29

10. Accompanying application stands disposed of.

¶30

Digitally signed by GIRISH KATHPALIA DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF DELHI, 2.5.4.20=8401dd889b27a77b2f65ffffe4afec45569af GIRISH 3962c6fb4835d435f97626cacca, ou=HIGH COURT OF DELHI,CID - 7047638, postalCode=110003, st=Delhi, serialNumber=d3e86796451ec45c07b5d15570996 KATHPALIA b40f80cbd2eee60402c487965ff801e26fa, cn=GIRISH KATHPALIA Date: 2026.05.13 05:32:36 +05'30'

¶31

GIRISH KATHPALIA (JUDGE)

¶32

MAY 13, 2026/ ry

¶33

BAIL APPLN. 1258/2026

¶34

Page 3 of 3 pages

¶35

Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:RAHUL YADAV Signing Da te:1 3.05.2026 17:42:21

Rifat Ali @ Danish v. State NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Rifat Ali @ Danish v. State NCT of Delhi

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Azad Saifi Vs Akhtar Ali

Manoj Godha Vs Vijay Shourie

Sabir Vs State (Govt. of NCT Delhi) & Anr.

Sh. Aftab Vs State (Gnct of Delhi)

Pallavi Shree Vs Mukesh Kumar Barnwal

Sonu Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi and Ors.