Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Anuj Kumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J
The petitioner has filed the present petition for seeking regular bail. It has been asserted that the petitioner was arrested vide FIR No. 210 of 2023, dated 5.8.2023, registered at Police Station Baddi, District Solan, H.P. It was falsely asserted that the contraband was supplied by the petitioner to the main accused. The investigation is complete, and a charge sheet has been filed before the Court. The prosecution case hinges on the transaction of Rs.47,500/- from Anuj Kumar (petitioner) to Mahendra Singh. This was a friendly loan extended by the petitioner. This transaction is not sufficient to connect the petitioner with the commission of the crime. There is a delay in the progress of the trial. Hence, it was prayed that the present petition be allowed and the petitioner be released on bail.
2. The petition is opposed by filing a status report, asserting that the police searched the house of Mohinder based on the information and recovered 14500 tablets weighing 5133 grams of Tramadol Hydrochloride, 11400 tablets weighing 1413.6 grams of Alprazolam tablets, and 600 tablets of Alprazolam weighing 61.2 grams. The drugs were seized, and a screenshot of th
A fresh bail application requires a substantial change in circumstances since the previous denial; adjournments sought by the petitioner do not justify bail.
Bail cannot be granted based on discrepancies in witness statements once the trial has commenced; substantial change in circumstances is required for reconsideration.
Bail applications require a material change in circumstances for reconsideration after a previous denial, ensuring the accused's presence during trial without undue delay.
A subsequent bail application can only be considered if there is a material change in circumstances, as established by judicial precedents.
Possession of an intermediate quantity of narcotics does not guarantee bail; each case must be assessed on its own facts considering societal implications.
Successive bail applications require substantial change in circumstances; filing charge sheet does not qualify as such, nor does unproven trial delay. Courts must exercise restraint to uphold judicia....
A subsequent bail application requires a material change in circumstances; mere claims of delay in trial do not suffice if the trial is progressing normally.
Grant of bail under the NDPS Act requires meeting specific twin conditions, which were not satisfied, and mere delay in trial does not justify bail unless supported by substantial change in circumsta....
The right to a speedy trial can be affected by the accused's actions, including seeking adjournments, which may negate claims for bail.
A subsequent bail application requires a material change in circumstances; the gravity of the offence can preclude bail even after prolonged custody.
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
