Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
FARJAND ALI
Sunil S/o Ranaram – 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 the instant third bail application under Section 483 BNSS 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 | 145/2023 |
| 2. | Concerned Police Station | Sendara |
| 3. | District | Pali |
| 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 | 23.04.2025 |
2. At the time of dismissing the second bail application of the petitioner as not pressed this Court vide order dated 26.11.2024 passed in SBCRLMB No.13306/2024 but liberty was afforded to the petitioner to renew the prayer for bail after the statement of Investigating Officer is recorded. Hence the instant bail application.
3. Bereft of elaborate details, the facts necessary for disposal of the instant bail application are that on the basis of secret information received from a confidential informant, the Station House Officer, Police Station Sendra, along with the police force, intercepted an XUV vehicle bearing registration number HR 26- BQ-2144. Upon search, 14 black plastic sacks and on
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 established that procedural non-compliance in drug seizure cases can justify bail, prioritizing individual liberty over statutory restrictions.
Procedural compliance in the NDPS Act is crucial for the admissibility of evidence, impacting the court's discretion in granting bail.
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 ....
Non-compliance with procedural requirements under the NDPS Act can undermine the prosecution's case and justify the grant of bail.
The court ruled that non-compliance with mandatory provisions of the NDPS Act can lead to bail being granted despite statutory restrictions.
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.
The court established that procedural compliance is crucial in drug-related cases, and significant lapses can warrant bail despite statutory restrictions.
Procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial; failure to adhere to sampling and inventory requirements can undermine the prosecution's case and justify bail.
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.
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
