Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
P.V.KUNHIKRISHNAN, J
Mohasin Ali Mylivalap S/o.abdul Salampil – Appellant
Versus
State Of Kerala – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. accused arrested for possession (Para 2 , 3 , 4) |
| 2. counsel argues for bail (Para 5 , 6) |
| 3. court reviews prior decisions (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. bail principles established (Para 10 , 11) |
ORDER :
This Bail Application is filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ), 2023.
2. The petitioner is an accused in Crime No.2246/2023 of Vanchiyoor Police Station, Thiruvananthapuram. The above case is registered against the petitioner alleging offences punishable under Section 22(c) and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances (NDPS) Act, 1985.
3. The prosecution case is that, on 25.11.2023 at about 02.50 AM, as per the instruction of the 2nd accused, the 1st accused collected 75.68 gms of MDMA from New Delhi and he brought the same at Thiruvananthapuram Railway Station. At the time of arrival of the 1st accused, the 2nd and 3rd accused came to the railway station to pick up the 1st accused from there and all the three were travelled in an autorickshaw from Central Railway Station, Thiruvananthapuram towards Kunnupuram Junction. They parked their autorickshaw at public road opposite to Akshara Offset Press at Kunnumpuram Road. The Sub Inspec
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; the court can relax stringent conditions under the NDPS Act in certain circumstances.
Prolonged incarceration due to prosecution delays can justify bail, overriding statutory restrictions under the NDPS Act, in light of Article 21 of the Constitution.
Prolonged incarceration due to prosecution delays may override statutory bail restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act, emphasizing personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution.
Prolonged incarceration due to prosecution delays can allow bail despite statutory restrictions under the NDPS Act, as it violates the fundamental right under Article 21 of the Constitution.
The court reaffirmed that bail is the rule and jail is the exception, emphasizing the need for fair trial rights and proper consideration of bail applications.
Prolonged incarceration without trial violates Article 21, allowing bail despite restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Bail is the rule and jail is the exception; solitary transactions do not constitute financing illicit trafficking under Section 27(A) of the NDPS Act.
The court determines that the detention of a petitioner for an NDPS offence is unnecessary due to the nature and quantity of the contraband, allowing bail with conditions.
The court determined that continued detention was unnecessary as the applicant presented no substantial evidence of guilt, thus granting bail.
The court emphasized the need for substantial grounds to believe in the applicant's innocence concerning serious NDPS Act charges.
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
