Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN
Balkishan, S/o. Late Shri Ramkishan – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP, Jaipur, Rajasthan – Respondent
ORDER :
ANIL KUMAR UPMAN, J.
1. These second bail applications under Section 483 BNSS have been filed on behalf of the petitioners, who have been arrested in connection with FIR No.302/2024 registered at Police Station Vaishali Nagar, District Jaipur (West) (Raj.) for offence punishable under Section 8/20 of the NDPS Act. After completion of investigation, police filed charge-sheet in this matter before the concerned Court for offences punishable under Sections 8/20 and 8/29 of the NDPS Act.
2. The first bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner, Balkishan was dismissed on merits by this Court vide order dated 28.11.2024 whereas the first bail application of the petitioner, Indrajit Mandal was dismissed as withdrawn by this Court vide order dated 28.11.2024. Now, these second bail applications have been preferred on behalf of the petitioners.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that petitioners have falsely been implicated in this case. It is submitted that petitioners Balkishan and Indrajit Mandal are in custody since 29.07.2024 and 17.09.2024, respectively, and as such, they have suffered incarceration of about one year and seven months and one year and four months
Prolonged incarceration infringes the right to speedy trial, allowing bail despite statutory restrictions under the NDPS Act when the trial is unlikely to conclude promptly.
The court established that procedural compliance under the NDPS Act is crucial for the admissibility of evidence, impacting the decision to grant bail.
Strict adherence to the provisions of the NDPS Act is mandatory for granting bail, especially concerning commercial quantities of narcotics, as reiterated by the court's findings.
Bail under the NDPS Act requires the accused to demonstrate reasonable grounds for believing they are not guilty, especially when substantial commercial quantities of contraband are involved.
The court emphasized that bail for drug offenses requires proof of innocence and likelihood of non-reoffending, in line with stringent statutory provisions to combat drug trafficking.
The court emphasized the necessity of compliance with NDPS Act provisions for admissibility of evidence, granting bail due to procedural lapses and prolonged incarceration.
The court emphasized that bail cannot be granted under the NDPS Act for commercial quantity offences unless conditions for non-guilt and lack of re-offending are satisfied, which were not met by the ....
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
