Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MILIND N. JADHAV
Ravi Manoj Rai – Appellant
Versus
Union Of India – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[MILIND N. JADHAV, J.]
1. Heard Mr. Ponda, learned Sr. Advocate for Applicant in BA 3846/2024; Mr. Setalvad, learned Sr. Advocate for Applicant in BA 4731/2024; Mr. Munde, learned Special P.P. for Respondent; Mr. Dedhia & Ms. Bajoria, learned APP for State. This common judgement will determine and dispose of both aforesaid Bail Applications.
2. Applicants - Accused Nos. 2 & 4 have filed the present Application for regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1973 (for short, "Cr.P.C.") in connection with F. No. SD/INT/INV/NCCP-01/2023-24 R & I for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c) r/w 21(a), 22(c), 23(a)(c), 27A, 28 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short "NDPS"). Both Application are heard and decided together due to commonality of facts and for brevity. They arise in the same crime.
3. The case of prosecution in a nutshell is that accused No.3 booked a parcel from Netherlands containing certain contraband in the name of accused No.1. The parcel was intercepted by the officers of Respondent based on specific intelligence received by Preventive Officer of NCCP indicating possibility of MDMA,[A Narcotic Drug an
The court ruled that reliance on inadmissible co-accused statements cannot sustain a conviction, leading to the grant of bail under the NDPS Act.
The court ruled that statements of co-accused are inadmissible without corroboration, impacting the prosecution's case for bail under the NDPS Act.
Statements of co-accused are inadmissible without corroboration, and mere association does not establish a prima facie case for bail denial under the NDPS Act.
The judgment emphasizes the principles of innocence until proven guilty, the need for substantive evidence to establish guilt, and the limitations on the admissibility of disclosure statements withou....
Prolonged detention without trial violates the right to a speedy trial, allowing bail despite statutory restrictions under the NDPS Act.
The court confirmed that under Section 37 NDPS Act, bail can only be granted if there are reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to re-offend.
(1) Standard prescribed for grant of bail is ‘reasonable ground to believe’ that person is not guilty of offence.(2) Given seriousness of offences punishable under NDPS Act and in order to curb menac....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the stringent parameters for granting bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the gravity of drug trafficking offences and the legislative intent to p....
The judgment establishes the importance of substantial probable causes and conscious possession in determining guilt under the NDPS Act.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
