Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, PRAVEEN KUMAR
Vishal Patel S/o Brij Kishore Patel @ Brij Kishor Raut – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. final ruling and considerations for bail. (Para 13) |
JUDGMENT :
RAJEEV RANJAN PRASAD, J.
Heard learned counsel for the appellant and learned Additional Public Prosecution for the State.
2. Records have been placed before this Court to consider the prayer of the appellant for suspension of his sentence and release on bail during pendency of the appeal.
3. The appellant has been convicted and sentenced vide judgment and order dated 28.09.2024 and 30.09.2024, respectively passed by the learned Exclusive Special Court No.II, NDPS Act, East Champaran at Motihari in connection with N.D.P.S. Case No. 108 of 2021 arising out of Sugauli P.S. Case No. 462 of 2021 and has been ordered to undergo a sentence of rigorous imprisonment for 14 years with a fine of Rs. 1,00,000/- each for the offence under Section 20(b)(ii)(c), 23(c) and 25 of the Narcotics Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act , 1985 (in short ‘NDPS Act’) and in default of payment of fine, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for six months each. All the sentences shall run concurrently.
4. The First Information Report is based on self statement of S.I., Vivek Kumar Jaiswal (P.W.-3) recorded by him on 03.11.2021
The court emphasized procedural discrepancies in evidence handling and the necessity for independent corroboration in drug-related cases, leading to bail grant.
Insufficient evidence and procedural non-compliance lead to granting bail in drug-related conviction.
The court emphasized the necessity for strict adherence to procedural safeguards in drug-related cases, ruling that non-compliance rendered the prosecution's case unsustainable.
Liberal approach for bail pending appeal in NDPS cases where substantial sentence (3.5/10 years) served, no antecedents, no exceptional circumstances, satisfying Section 37 and upholding Article 21.
Procedural lapses in evidence collection under the NDPS Act, particularly failure to comply with Section 52A, render prosecution's case insufficient for conviction.
Failure to comply with mandatory procedures under the NDPS Act vitiates conviction, necessitating primary evidence for a valid trial.
Point of Law : NDPS Act – Conviction set aside - Complete lack of evidence as to whether the seized substances were sealed at all muchless in presence of responsible person.
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
