SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2000 Supreme(SC) 234

G.B.PATTANAIK, UMESH C.BANERJEE
Union Of India Through Central Bureau Of Narcotics Commissioner, Lucknow – Appellant
Versus
Aharwa Deen – Respondent


(1) LEAVE granted.

(2) THE Union of India is in appeal against the order of the learned single Judge of the Allahabad High Court, Lucknow Bench, Lucknow, granting bail to the respondent in case under Section 8/18 NDPS Act. Pursuant to the notice issued, the respondent has entered appearance. A letter was circulated praying for adjournment to file a counter affidavit. But we see no justification for a counter affidavit being filed in a case in hand. Since on the face of the impugned order of the High Court granting bail cannot be sustained as the High Court has not looked into the provisions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act.

(3) HAVING heard the learned counsel for the parties and on examining the record of this case we have no hesitation to come to the conclusion that the High Court was totally in error in granting bail without even focussing its attention to the mandatory provision of Section 37 of the NDPS Act. In that view of the matter, we allow the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court.

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top