Back
KALYAN RAI SURANA
Sahil Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Union of India – Respondent
ORDER :
Kalyan Rai Surana, J.
1. Heard Mr. D.K. Baidya, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. S.C. Keyal, learned counsel for the respondent, i.e. Union of India, represented by the Customs Department.
2. By this application filed under section 483 BNSS, the petitioners, namely, (1) Sahil Sharma, and (2) Akshay Kumar, who are in custody since their arrest on 19.05.2022 in connection with Special NDPS Case No. 79/2022, arising out of Case No. 01/CL/NDPS/AS/KXJ/2022-23 under section 22(c)/25/29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (NDPS Act for short), have prayed for bail. The petitioners are being tried before the Court of the learned Special Judge, Karimganj.
3. This application is the fourth bail application by the petitioners. The previous two bail applications of the petitioners were rejected by this Court vide (i) order dated 16.02.2023, passed in B.A. No. 3464/2022, and (ii) order dated 07.11.2023, passed in B.A. No. 2989/2023, and (iii) 28.06.2024, passed in B.A. No. 338/2024.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that till today i.e. 05.08.2024, the petitioners have been in custody for 809 days. It was also submitted that t
The court ruled that under the NDPS Act, bail requires reasonable grounds for believing the accused are not guilty and unlikely to offend again, regardless of detention length.
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.
The right to a speedy trial can necessitate granting bail even under stringent conditions, particularly when incarceration exceeds reasonable limits.
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 main legal point established in the judgment is that the delay in trial and non-compliance of certain provisions of the NDPS Act can violate the constitutional rights of the accused under Article....
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates the right to personal liberty under Article 21, necessitating the grant of bail even under stringent provisions like the NDPS Act if no reasonable groun....
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates personal liberty; bail is granted when no reasonable grounds exist for guilt.
Prolonged incarceration without trial infringes the fundamental right to personal liberty under Article 21, requiring bail to be granted in cases of no substantive evidence against the accused and ex....
The court reinforced that bail serves to protect an individual's personal liberty, particularly when prolonged detention without trial raises constitutional concerns under Article 21, emphasizing the....
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
