Bail in cross-border drug cases can't ignore threat to sovereignty: HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has held that courts must exercise utmost caution while considering bail in drug cases involving cross-border syndicates, warning that such offences can imperil the country’s sovereignty and security.

The Bench observed that when the drug mafia operates in nexus with elements across the border, investigation becomes “almost impossible,” and bail in cases of commercial quantity “must not impair or affect India’s sovereignty.”

“The petitioner, allegedly in cohorts with his accomplices and the cross-border drug mafia based in Pakistan, smuggled a large quantity of heroin into India. When a drug mafia has cross-border links with a hostile neighbor, gathering information through investigation across the border becomes almost impossible,” the court noted.

Additionally, when evidence points to a cross-border drug mafia, the court must be cautious to ensure that granting bail for a commercial quantity of drugs does not impair or affect India's sovereignty, it added.

The observations came during the hearing of a regular bail plea arising out of an FIR registered on November 5, 2024, at the Airport police station in Amritsar under the provisions of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act.

As per the status report, the seizure comprised 1 kg of heroin and 1 kg of ‘Ice’ or methamphetamine falling under the category of commercial quantity.

Holding that the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act were attracted, the Bench ruled that the material on record furnished prima facie evidence connecting the petitioner to the crime.

“A perusal of the bail petition and the documents attached prima facie points towards the petitioner’s involvement and does not make out a case for bail. The impact of crime would also not justify bail,” the court asserted, while declining to elaborate further so as not to prejudice the trial.

Rejecting the plea, the Bench further clarified that the petitioner’s custody of about 10 months as on September 9, 2025, “cannot be termed prolonged” in view of the minimum sentence prescribed for the offence.

However, the court left open the possibility of renewed consideration by directing that the trial court might entertain a fresh bail plea “unaffected by the present dismissal or the petitioner’s criminal history” if the trial did not conclude within one-and-a-half year and the delay was not attributable to the petitioner.