Back
P. V. KUNHIKRISHNAN
Ravi Jaiswal S/o Basanth Barsath Jaiswal – Appellant
Versus
State of Kerala – Respondent
ORDER :
P.V. KUNHIKRISHNAN, J.
This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
2. Petitioner is the 3 rd accused in Crime No.1614/2023 of Nadakkavu Police Station. The above case is registered against the petitioner and others alleging offences punishable under Sections 20(b)(ii)C and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, NDPS Act).
3. The prosecution case is that, on 28.12.2023 at about 12.30 am, accused Nos.1 and 2 in the crime were found in a car bearing registration No. AP-31/AZ- 7444 in the parking area opposite to the State Bank of India, YMCA Cross road, Kozhikode. On search of the car, 51.9 Kg of ganja was found kept in the boot space. Accused Nos.1 and 2 were arrested on the spot. Thereafter the petitioner who is the 3 rd accused was arrested on 28.06.2024. The final report was filed on 24.07.2024.
4. Heard counsel for the petitioner and the Public Prosecutor.
5. The counsel for the petitioner raised a short point. The counsel submitted that as far as the petitioner who is the 3 rd accused is concerned, there is only confession statement of the co-accused. The counsel submitted that the confes
The court ruled that incomplete investigation and lack of admissible evidence entitled the petitioner to statutory bail, affirming that bail is the rule and jail is the exception.
Point of law :Rejection of Bail - Only in the case when a charge-sheet is not filed and investigation is kept pending, the benefit of the proviso appended to sub-section (2) of S.167 of the Code woul....
In NDPS commercial quantity cases, co-accused confessional statements inadmissible against petitioner; call detail records alone insufficient for Section 37 twin conditions; bail on parity where co-a....
A prima facie case for drug-related offences can exist without possession of contraband if evidence of conspiracy is present, and bail court findings are not binding on trial courts.
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.
Financial transactions and call records alone are insufficient to justify denial of bail under the NDPS Act when no substantial evidence connects the accused to the crime.
In bail applications under the NDPS Act, the court should consider not only the statements of the co-accused but also call record details and other incriminating evidence when assessing the petitione....
Oral application is sufficient to release accused on statutory bail.
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
