Primary sources · Judgment
PASCHAL OBINNA NWAGBAOSO Vs NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU
BAIL APPLN. 3670/2025 Page 1 of 3 pages
$~72
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
% Date of Decision: 12.08.2026
# CNR No. DLHC010725122025
+ BAIL APPLN. 3670/2025
PASCHAL OBINNA NWAGBAOSO .....Petitioner
Through: Mr. Sushma Sharma and Mr. Girish
Kumar, Advocates.
versus
NARCOTIC CONTROL BUREAU .....Respondent
Through: Ms. Shelly Dixit, Advocate.
CORAM: JUSTICE GIRISH KATHPALIA
J U D G M E N T (ORAL)
1. The accused/applicant seeks regular bail in complaint case no.
VIII/77/DZU/2021 of PS NCB Delhi for offence under Section
8(c)/20(b)/21(b)/22(c)/23/25 & 29 NDPS Act.
2. This application came up for first hearing on 23.09.2025 before the
predecessor bench and remained pending before different benches for one or
the other reasons and finally it was transferred to this bench for hearing
today.
3. Broadly speaking, allegation of prosecution is that from possession of
BAIL APPLN. 3670/2025 Page 2 of 3 pages
the accused/applicant 60 grams cocaine (intermediate quantity) and 55
grams Methamphetamine (commercial quantity) was recovered. The
accused/applicant is in jail since 08.12.2021 and his Visa also has expired.
4. Earlier bail application of the accused/applicant, registered as Bail
Application No.1950/2025 was dismissed by this bench on 20.05.2025.
Learned counsel for accused/applicant submits that the only ground on
which bail is sought by the accused/applicant is delay in trial. It is contended
that on 20.05.2025, when the earlier bail application of the accused/applicant
was dismissed, the trial status was that out of 22 prosecution witnesses only
07 had been examined, and the current trial status is that only 08 witnesses
out of 22 prosecution witnesses have been examined.
5. Learned counsel for respondent NCB does not dispute the trial status,
as informed by counsel for accused/applicant. However, learned counsel for
respondent NCB requests that the trial court may be directed to expedite the
trial, instead of releasing the accused/applicant on bail, because the
accused/applicant is a foreign national.
6. As mentioned above, the admitted pace of trial is that in the period of
more than one year, only one witness of prosecution could be examined
before the trial court. Of course, it is not that the trial court is not proceeding
with diligence. The board load of the trial court has not been disclosed by
either side. Even otherwise, there can be multiple reasons leading to delay in
BAIL APPLN. 3670/2025 Page 3 of 3 pages
trial. The fact remains that the accused/applicant is in jail since 08.12.2021
and end of trial is nowhere in the sight.
7. The apprehension expressed by the learned counsel for respondent
NCB that the accused/applicant is a foreign national, can be dealt with by
directing that custody of the accused/applicant be handed over to FRRO
since his Visa has expired.
8. Considering the above circumstances, the bail application is allowed
and subject to the accused/applicant furnishing a personal bond in the sum
of Rs.1,00,000/- with one surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the
trial court, the accused/applicant be released on bail by handing over his
custody to FRRO.
9. Copy of this order be sent to the concerned Jail Superintendent for
being informed to the accused/applicant.
GIRISH KATHPALIA
(JUDGE)
AUGUST 12, 2026/ry