HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
HASMUKH D. SUTHAR
Dhanani Afzal Salimbhai – Appellant
Versus
State of Gujarat – Respondent
ORDER :
(HASMUKH D. SUTHAR, J.)
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of notice of rule on behalf of respondent-State.
2. By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.11192008250036 of 2025 registered with Bavla Police Station, Ahmedabad Rural, for the offences punishable under Sections 8(c), 21(c), and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as ‘NDPS Act’ for short).
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is innocent and has not committed any offence as alleged in the FIR. Merely on the basis of statement made by the co-accused, his name has been impleaded as an accused. Nothing is recovered from conscious possession of the applicant. Whatever allegations levelled against the accused persons are that Applicant is running the business of pharmacy in the name of A A distributor and having the licence under Drug and Cosmetic Act. He is Engaged in the business of selling medicine and alleged cough syrup ‘Codeine’ came to be sold to one Saf
The court emphasized that under the NDPS Act, the burden of proof shifts to the accused, especially in cases involving commercial quantities of narcotic drugs, necessitating custodial interrogation.
The court held that possession of narcotic drugs in significant quantities under NDPS Act warrants stringent bail conditions, emphasizing the necessity of statutory compliance regarding search and se....
Successive anticipatory bail applications require a change in circumstances; otherwise, they may be dismissed due to the serious nature of the offence and need for custodial interrogation.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the strict application of the NDPS Act, particularly in cases involving the sale of contraband substances, and the court's discretion in granting a....
Possession of cough syrup containing codeine qualifies as a narcotic under the NDPS Act, with strict bail conditions imposed that were not satisfied in this case.
In narcotic offences, bail is only granted when it is proven that the accused is not involved with the contraband, with a stringent evaluation of public safety interests.
The court held that strict compliance with licensing conditions under the NDPS Act is essential, and significant illegal possession of narcotics justifies rejection of bail applications.
The accused must satisfy the twin conditions under Entry 35 of the Notification and produce necessary evidence of engagement in therapeutic practice for medical or scientific purposes to overcome the....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the stringent conditions for granting bail under Section 37 of the NDPS act, emphasizing the legislative intent to prevent the devastating impact o....
Cough syrup with Codeine Phosphate below 2.5% concentration, compounded and established in therapeutic practice, excluded from 'manufactured drug' under NDPS Act notification; bail granted post-chall....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.