Back
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
MRM
JAISWAL RAHUL GANESHLAL – Appellant
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT – Respondent
ORDER :
(M.R. MENGDEY, J.)
1. The present application is filed under Section 483 of the Bhartiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhit, 2023, for regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R.NO. 11212051211014 of 2021 registered with Surat Railway Police Station, Surat for the offences punishable under Sections 8(C) , 20(b)(ii) and 29 of the NDPS Act.
2. Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant has been arrested in connection with the present offence on 01.05.2024 and since then the he is in custody. Earlier, the applicant had preferred Criminal Misc. Application No.23808 of 2024, which was allowed to be withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 06.12.2024 and since thereafter, there is no progress in the trial, the applicant has preferred the present application.
2.1 Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the quantity of contraband substance involved in the present offence is an intermediate quantity, and therefore, rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act would not be applicable to the present case.
2.2 Learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the only role attributed to the present applicant is to the effect that the present applicant had supplied
Successive bail applications require a change in circumstances; habitual offenders under the NDPS Act face stricter scrutiny for bail.
The NDPS Act imposes stringent requirements for bail in drug-related offenses, emphasizing societal safety over individual liberty when evidence of conscious possession exists.
The court emphasized that bail is a rule and jail is an exception, particularly when the accused is not charged with a serious offence and has been in custody for an extended period.
The court ruled that possession of a non-commercial quantity of narcotics does not invoke the rigors of Section 37 of the NDPS Act, allowing for bail based on the presumption of innocence.
The rigour under Section 37(1)(b)(ii) of the NDPS Act and the importance of considering the mandate under Section 37 NDPS Act in granting bail.
The court denied bail based on the applicant's habitual offending and the serious nature of the allegations under the NDPS Act.
The court held that bail for offences involving commercial quantities of narcotics requires strict adherence to Section 37 of the NDPS Act, emphasizing the necessity of satisfying specific conditions....
Prolonged incarceration due to prosecution delays can override statutory bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, aligning with Article 21's protection of personal liberty.
The court emphasized that the mandatory conditions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act must be satisfied for bail, particularly in cases involving commercial quantities of contraband.
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
