In a brief yet significant order, the Supreme Court on Monday allowed the bail plea of Tinku SK @ Tinku Sekh, who has been in custody under serious charges filed under the NDPS Act. The bench, hearing the matter in Court No. 16, appeared concerned with the slow progress of the trial and took a practical view of the situation.
Background
Tinku Sekh was arrested for alleged offences under Sections 21(C) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act-provisions that deal with possession of commercial quantities of narcotics and conspiracy. His bail pleas had earlier been rejected by the trial court and later by the Calcutta High Court, which upheld continued incarceration.
Read also:- Supreme Court Clarifies When Appeal Time Starts in Environmental Clearance Cases, Dismisses Talli Gram
When the matter reached the Supreme Court through a Special Leave Petition, the case had already crossed several procedural steps. The charge sheet was filed, charges were framed, yet not even the first prosecution witness had been examined. This factual timeline became crucial during the hearing.
Court’s Observations
The bench of Justice Aravind Kumar and Justice Manmohan listened to both sides patiently. Counsel for the petitioner, led by advocate Soumya Dutta, argued that the case was moving at a snail’s pace, and keeping the accused in jail indefinitely would serve no purpose. The State opposed the plea but did not dispute the delay in witness examination.
Read also:- Supreme Court Clarifies: Assignment of Specific Performance Decrees Need No Registration, Ending
During the proceedings, the bench made a pointed remark that stood out:
“The charge-sheet is filed, charges are framed, and none of the witnesses have been examined,” the judges observed, noting that further custody would not be justified in such circumstances.
One lawyer near me whispered, “This is a classic delay issue; the Court won’t tolerate unnecessary jail time,” reflecting the mood inside the courtroom. The bench itself stated that it would not comment on the merits of the case, but the lack of progress was too significant to ignore.
Read also:- Rajasthan High Court Refuses State’s Appeal After Acquittal in POCSO Case, Says DNA Alone Cannot Establish Rape Without Clear Victim Testimony
Decision
Finally, the Supreme Court decided to interfere with the earlier order and granted regular bail to Tinku Sekh. The impugned High Court order was set aside, and the appellant was directed to be released on bail, subject to conditions to be imposed by the jurisdictional court. The appeal was allowed in clear terms, and pending applications were also disposed of.
With this, the Court ended the matter, firmly anchoring its decision on the delays and the principle that incarceration should not become punishment before conviction.
Case Title: Tinku SK @ Tinku Sekh vs. State of West Bengal
Court: Supreme Court of India
Jurisdiction: Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction
Case Type: Criminal Appeal arising from SLP (Crl.) No. 13997/2025
Impugned Order: Calcutta High Court order dated 02 July 2025
Date of SC Order: 17 November 2025
