Back
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE FARJAND ALI, J
Anil – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
Order :
1. The jurisdiction of this court has been invoked by way of filing the instant 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 | 27/2023 |
| 2. | Concerned Police Station | Dangiyawas |
| 3. | District | Jodhpur City East |
| 4. | Offences alleged in the FIR | Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act |
| 5. | Offences added, if any | Section 8/25 of the NDPS Act |
| 6. | Date of passing of impugned order | 12.03.2024 |
2. The previous application being S.B. Criminal Misc. Bail Application No.16315/2023 came to be dismissed as not pressed by this Court vide order dated 10.01.2024. Hence, the instant bail application.
3. The case, in brief, revolves around the events of 01.02.2023, SHO, Dangiyawas upon receiving an information intercepted a car bearing registration No.RJ02 CD1488. The said vehicle was being driven by one Anil and the person sitting by his side was Chandra Mohan. Upon search 120 Kg poppy husk came to be recovered. The accused failed to produce any license or permit for possessing or transporting the contraband. Consequently, an FIR No.27/2023 was registered under Section 8/15 of the NDPS Act. After the in
Provisional liberty can override statutory restrictions on bail under the NDPS Act when trial delays are evident, emphasizing the fundamental right to personal liberty.
The court established that non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act can render evidence inadmissible, and that prolonged detention without trial can justify the grant of bail despite ....
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, which can override statutory restrictions on bail.
The court established that prolonged detention without sufficient evidence violates personal liberty, and bail should be granted if the prosecution fails to demonstrate a direct connection to the all....
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 right to liberty is fundamental, and bail may be granted despite statutory restrictions when circumstances justify it, emphasizing the importance of timely trials.
The court established that procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial, and failure to adhere to such provisions can lead to the grant of bail even in serious cases.
The court emphasized that personal liberty must be prioritized over statutory restrictions in granting bail, especially when there are violations of mandatory provisions.
The right to a speedy trial is a fundamental right under Article 21, and prolonged detention without trial can lead to bail being granted despite statutory restrictions.
Bail is the rule at the pre-conviction stage, and prolonged incarceration without trial is unjustified, emphasizing the right to a speedy trial.
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
