Back
KALYAN RAI SURANA
Amad Uddin Tapadar – Appellant
Versus
State of Assam – Respondent
ORDER :
Kalyan Rai Surana, J.
1. Heard Mr. B.C. Das, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. S.H. Rahman, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Mr. K.K. Das, learned Addl. P.P. for the State.
2. By this bail application filed under section 439 Cr.P.C., the petitioner, Amad Uddin Tapadar, who is in custody since his arrest on 12.10.2022 in connection with Karimganj PS Case No. 588/2022 is praying for default bail.
3. The said Karimganj PS Case No. 588/2022 is being tried before the Court of learned Special Judge, Karimganj as Special (NDPS) Case No. 155/2022 under Sections 21(c), 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act, 1985.
4. The learned senior counsel for the petitioner had submitted that the petitioner has spent 581 days in custody as on 15.05.2024, the date when the matter was heard.
5. In this application, the petitioner has disclosed that the following previous application for bail were rejected by this Court, viz., (i) B.A. No. 302/2023, disposed of by order dated 10.02.2023; (ii) B.A. No. 1901/2023, disposed of by order dated 14.06.2023; and (iii) B.A. No. 444/2023, disposed of by order dated 05.01.2024. It is thus projected that this is the fourth bail application of the petitioner
The court denied bail under the NDPS Act, emphasizing the necessity of reasonable grounds for believing the accused is not guilty and unlikely to commit further offenses.
Prolonged incarceration without trial infringes upon fundamental rights, warranting bail despite the serious nature of charges under the NDPS Act.
The absence of a chemical examination report does not render a bail application incomplete under the NDPS Act; the petitioner must satisfy the twin conditions for bail.
Prolonged incarceration and lack of evidence necessitate bail, emphasizing personal liberty and the right to a speedy trial under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Bail should not be denied solely based on co-accused statements without sufficient evidence; the presumption of innocence persists until proven guilty, emphasizing that the general rule favors bail.
The court emphasized the importance of compliance with procedural safeguards in drug-related cases, granting bail due to significant delays and procedural lapses.
The court emphasized the importance of compliance with procedural safeguards in drug-related cases, granting bail due to significant delays in trial and legal defects in the prosecution's case.
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
