Back
FARJAND ALI
Dal Singh S/o Shri Tagu – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing an instant second bail application under Section 439 CrPC at the instance of accused-petitioner. The requisite details of the matter are tabulated herein below:
| S.No. | Particulars of the Case | |
| 1. | FIR Number | 308/2021 |
| 2. | Concerned Police Station | Sajjangarh |
| 3. | District | Banswara |
| 4. | Offences alleged in the FIR | Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act |
| 5. | Offences added, if any | - |
| 6. | Date of passing of impugned order | 05.05.2022 |
2. The first bail application of petitioner came to be disposed of by this Court vide order dated 27.02.2024 passed in SBCRLMB No.6681/2022 with the liberty of file afresh after recording the statement of Seizing Officer. Now the statement of Seizing Officer is recorded. Hence, the instant bail application.
3. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that no case for the alleged offences is made out against him and his incarceration is not warranted. He contends that as per the definition given under Section (2) of the NDPS Act, only the flowering or fruiting tops of the cannabis plants (hemps) can be considered as Ganja. Now it is not discerni
The court established that procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial for the admissibility of evidence, impacting the decision to grant bail.
Procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial; failure to adhere to Section 52A can lead to the inadmissibility of evidence and impact bail decisions.
The court emphasized the importance of adhering to procedural requirements in drug seizure cases, ruling that non-compliance can render evidence inadmissible and affect bail decisions.
Procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial for the admissibility of evidence, and failure to adhere to these provisions can lead to the grant of bail.
The court emphasized the importance of compliance with procedural safeguards in drug-related cases, ruling that non-compliance can render evidence inadmissible and affect bail decisions.
Procedural non-compliance in drug seizure cases can lead to bail being granted, especially when the accused has been in custody for an extended period without trial.
The court emphasized the necessity of compliance with NDPS Act provisions for admissibility of evidence, granting bail due to procedural lapses and prolonged incarceration.
Non-compliance with procedural requirements under the NDPS Act can undermine the prosecution's case and justify the grant of bail.
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.
Procedural compliance in the NDPS Act is crucial for the admissibility of evidence, impacting the court's discretion in granting 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
