Chintan Rajubhai Panseriya v. State of Maharashtra - Criminal Trial - Multiplying Witnesses

No Point In Multiplying Witnesses On One And The Same Issue In Criminal Trial: Supreme Court

Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act) - Sections 8(b), 22(c), 25, 27‑A, 29 - Bail - The petitioner, accused in an NDPS case involving alleged possession of about 2,428 kilograms of Mephedrone had been in judicial custody as an undertrial for about three and a half years, with charges only recently framed on 16‑01‑2026 and the prosecution proposing to examine 159 witnesses. Considering the prolonged pre‑trial custody, likely length of the trial, and without delving into the merits of the accusations, the Supreme Court granted bail and observed: Examination of 159 witnesses or even 50% of the same is going to take a pretty long time. At times, we wonder why prosecution wants to examine so many witnesses and thereby prolong the trial and delay the same. We have observed in number of orders that the prosecution should examine important witnesses and try to establish its case. There is no point in multiplying the witnesses on one and the same issue.

Case Info


Basic Case Details


Case name:Chintan Rajubhai Panseriya v. State of Maharashtra (from the title “CHINTAN RAJUBHAI PANSERIYA Petitioner(s) VERSUS THE STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Respondent(s)”).


Court:Supreme Court of India.


Case type and number:Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 439 of 2026.


Judgment / order date:28‑01‑2026 (appears at the top of the order and in the cause title line: “Date : 28‑01‑2026 This matter was called on for hearing today.”).


Neutral citation:No neutral citation is mentioned in the text. The Supreme Court neutral citation format (e.g. 2026 INSC …) does not appear anywhere in the order.


Coram


Coram:Hon’ble Mr. Justice J.B. PardiwalaHon’ble Mr. Justice K.V. Viswanathan


Case laws and citations


No other judgments are cited in this order. There are no reported case citations (like SCC, AIR, or any neutral citations to earlier decisions) mentioned in the text you provided.


Statutes / laws referred


The order refers to:

  1. Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act)
    • Sections: 8(b), 22(c), 25, 27‑A, 29.
  2. Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC)
    • Section 294 (noted in para 4, regarding compliance after framing of charge).