FARJAND ALI
Govind Bahadur S/o Sundar – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP – Respondent
ORDER :
Farjand Ali, J.
1. The jurisdiction of this Court has been invoked by way of filing this application under Section 439 Cr.P.C. 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 | 313/2022 |
| 2. | Concerned Police Station | Anoopgarh |
| 3. | District | Sri Ganganagar |
| 4. | Offences alleged in the FIR | Under Section 8/15, 25 and 29 of the NDPS Act |
| 5. | Date of passing of impugned order | 15.10.2024 |
2. It is contended on behalf of the accused-petitioner that co-accused Bhagirath S/o Chananram, whose case is exactly similar to that of the petitioner has been enlarged on bail by this court vide order dated 09.10.2024, thus, on the ground of parity, the petitioner too deserves to be granted the same indulgence.
3. Contrary to the submissions of learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Public Prosecutor opposes the bail application.
4. I have considered the submissions made by both the parties and have perused the material available on record. Co-accused Bhagirath S/o Chananram, whose case is not at all distinguisha
The court emphasized that personal liberty must be prioritized over statutory restrictions in granting bail, especially when there are violations of mandatory provisions.
The court prioritized the fundamental right to a speedy trial over statutory restrictions on bail under the NDPS Act, allowing bail due to prolonged incarceration and procedural non-compliance.
The court emphasized the fundamental right to a speedy trial over statutory restrictions on bail, allowing bail due to prolonged incarceration without trial.
The court established that procedural non-compliance in drug seizure cases can justify bail, prioritizing individual liberty over statutory restrictions.
The court established that the right to a speedy trial and personal liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution can override the statutory restrictions on bail under the NDPS Act, particularly when ....
The court established that the right to personal liberty and a speedy trial can override statutory restrictions on bail under the NDPS Act.
The court established that personal liberty and the right to a speedy trial can override statutory restrictions on bail under the NDPS Act when evidence is insufficient.
The court ruled that non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act can lead to bail being granted despite statutory restrictions.
Procedural irregularities in the seizure of evidence under the NDPS Act can lead to the grant of bail, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the right to a speedy trial.
The court ruled that unauthorized searches under the NDPS Act invalidate the evidence, warranting bail for the accused due to procedural non-compliance.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.