Back
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Shivji Ram @ Shivji – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. bail application filed under ndps act. (Para 1) |
| 2. court's observations on applicability of ndps provisions. (Para 2 , 5) |
| 3. petitioner's arguments on bail eligibility. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 4. court's opinion on bail grant. (Para 6) |
| 5. order for release on bail with conditions. (Para 7) |
ORDER :
1. The present bail application has been filed under Section 439 Cr.PC. On behalf of the petitioner, who is in custody in connection with F.I.R. No. 0025/2023, Police Station Mangaliyawas, District Ajmer, for the offence under Section 8 /18 for the NDPS Act.
2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Public Prosecutor. Perused the material available on record.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that as per Note No. 3 appended below the Schedule of the NDPS Act, cultivation of poppy straw would be punishable under Section 18 (C) of the NDPS Act and thus, the restriction contained in Section 37 of the NDPS Act cannot operate against the petitioner. He contends that the petitioner has no previous criminal antecedents. He submits that investigation is complete and charge-sheet has been filed and the trial of the case is likely to consume time. He thus prays that the
The court determined that the restrictions of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply when the offence does not involve commercial quantity or severe sections, allowing bail.
The court considered the lengthy trial process and absence of other pending cases in granting bail to the accused-petitioner for the offense under the NDPS act.
The court granted bail under the NDPS Act, finding no commercial quantity prescribed for cultivation and no risk of tampering with evidence.
The absence of specified small and commercial quantities for opium poppy cultivation under the NDPS Act means Section 37 does not apply, allowing for bail.
The court established that bail can be granted under Section 439 Cr.P.C. even in cases involving serious allegations under the NDPS Act, provided the circumstances warrant such a decision.
The court ruled that restrictions under Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply when no defined quantity for commercial classification exists, allowing bail.
The stringent bail conditions under Section 37 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, are not applicable to cases involving the illicit cultivation of poppy plants, as the legis....
In cases involving the illegal cultivation of poppy plants under narcotics legislation, the restrictive bail provisions are not attracted. Courts may grant bail upon considering factors such as the c....
The court ruled that the absence of specified commercial quantity for poppy cultivation under the NDPS Act, combined with lack of evidence tampering risk, justifies 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
