LexStreakRead free →
Supreme Court of India· 17 August 2026

Does an appeal against grant of bail become a proceeding for cancellation of bail where the accused has jumped the bail and the sureties are found to be fake?

UNION OF INDIA v. CHIDIEBERE KINGSLEY NAWCHARA & ORS
2026 INSC 870 · SLP (Crl) No. 14185 of 2025
Coram: Sanjay Karol; Augustine George Masih
🔖 Save this judgment🔔 Follow s.37 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotr…📬 Get today's judgments
View the original judgment PDFFree to read. To download it — or the LexStreak typeset copy with the headnote and Points of Law — create an account; downloads are part of the Pro plan.
Answer

Yes. Where the operation of the bail order is stayed, the accused cannot be arrested despite a Look Out Notice having been issued, and the sureties submitted on his behalf are found to be fake, the conditions imposed for grant of bail have been violated. The proceeding is then no longer a petition against a grant of bail but is instead a proceeding for cancellation of bail, and the bail granted in terms of the impugned order stands cancelled.

Headnote

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s.37 — s.31A — Constitution of India — Art.21 — Art.142 — Bail — Foreign nationals — Sureties — Cancellation of bail — Directions — Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — s.37 — Grant of bail — Twin conditions cumulative — Held: Bail under the NDPS Act cannot rest on absence of recovery alone; the Court must record reasonable grounds for believing that he is not guilty and address the possibility of his again committing such a crime — both conditions, not either of them. (¶14) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 — Cancellation of bail — Accused jumping bail on fake sureties — Held further: Where the accused jumped the bail and the sureties furnished on his behalf are found to be fake, the appeal is no longer a petition against a grant of bail but a proceeding for cancellation of bail. (¶17) Constitution of India — Art.21 — Bail to foreign nationals — Special conditions permissible — Held further: Foreign nationals are entitled to protection under Article 21, and merely because an accused is a foreigner the right to bail cannot be circumscribed. Special conditions are permissible, but must be reasonable, proportionate and capable of compliance. (¶13) Constitution of India — Art.142 — Stop-gap directions — Verification of sureties for foreign nationals — Held further: In view of lack of uniformity across jurisdictions, Article 142 may be exercised to put in place stop-gap arrangements governing sureties for foreign national accused, leaving it open for the legislative wing of the Government to step in. Appeal disposed of. (¶27, 29)

In the Court's own words
Paragraph 17Considering the totality of the factual matrix, on 19th September 2025, we had stayed the operation of the impugned bail order and directed the DGPM, to take steps to arrest the respondent-accused. It is also a matter of record that despite the Look Out Notice[^49] having been issued, and other steps having been taken by the concerned authorities, the respondent-accused could not be arrested. Simply put, he jumped the bail. In these circumstances, the present appeal is no longer a petition against a grant of bail but is instead a proceeding for cancellation of bail because the conditions imposed for grant of bail have been violated. Hence, the bail granted in terms of the impugned order stands cancelled. The present case acquires great importance, for the reason that upon orders of this Court, the accused was directed to be arrested; the authorities undertook a verification of the sureties submitted on his behalf and found the same to be fake. In the next part of our opinion, we deal with this issue.
Paragraph 17Liability, forfeiture and recovery.— a) Forfeiture of bail bonds shall be governed by the provisions of the BNSS or CrPC. b) Any recovery from the accused or the indemnitor shall be limited to the amount of the bond, together with such reasonable and documented expenses as may have been actually and necessarily incurred, and shall not include any penal or speculative charge. CHAPTER VI: SPECIAL PROVISIONS FOR FOREIGN NATIONALS
Acts & Sections
s.37 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985s.31A Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985s.8(c) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985s.21(c) Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985s.27A Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985s.34 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985s.67 Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985Art.142 Constitution of IndiaArt.21 Constitution of IndiaArt.19(1)(d) Constitution of IndiaArt.32 Constitution of Indias.436A Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s.441A Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s.446 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973s.479 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s.129 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s.491 Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023s.45 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002s.24 Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002s.43D Unlawful Activities Prevention Act, 1967s.10(3)(e) Passports Act, 1967s.4 Legal Services Authorities Act, 1987Aadhaar Authentication for Good Governance Rules, 2020

One judgment a day. That's the whole habit.

Read the full text of UNION OF INDIA v. CHIDIEBERE KINGSLEY NAWCHARA & ORS — and get the Supreme Court's output as a five-minute daily read, with plain-language headnotes and the questions each judgment settles.

Create my free account

Free forever plan · 30 seconds · data stays in India

Open the full judgment →

Also decided in this judgment
Under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, must both conditions in Section 37 be satisfied before bail is granted, or does either suffice?Can the right to bail be circumscribed merely because the accused is a foreigner?When may this Court exercise its power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India where each State and High Court already has a process in place?
Plain-language answer prepared by the LexStreak Editorial Desk — verify against the judgment. Source: Supreme Court of India. Corrections