Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Virender Singh, J
Ngawang Nyima – Appellant
Versus
State of H.P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, Judge
Applicant Ngawang Nyima has filed the present application, under Section 483 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS S ’) for releasing him, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No. 11 of 2025, dated 11.1.2025, registered under Sections 21, 29- 61-1985 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the NDPS Act’), and Section 212 (A) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNS ’), with Police Station, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P.
2. The applicant has pleaded that he is an innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in the present case, as he has no concern whatsoever with the alleged offence, for which, he has been arrested, by the police.
3. According to the applicant, no recovery has been effected from his possession. Investigation, in the present case, is stated to be completed. As such, according to the applicant, his custodial interrogation is no longer required by the Police, in this case.
4. It is the case of the applicant that the arrest of the applicant, in the present case, is far from truth, with a view to malign his reputat
The court granted bail, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the lack of necessity for continued custody after investigation completion.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited; bail may be granted when the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, ensuring the applicant's rights are protected.
The presumption of innocence remains intact despite the registration of a case, and bail is granted when the contraband does not meet the commercial quantity threshold.
Bail cannot be denied as punishment; the absence of prior convictions and the nature of contraband are crucial in granting bail under the NDPS Act.
The court ruled that the applicant is entitled to bail as the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
Bail cannot be denied as punishment; presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, and non-commercial quantity of contraband allows for bail under NDPS Act.
The presumption of innocence remains intact despite multiple cases against the applicant, and bail is granted as the quantity of contraband does not constitute 'commercial quantity' under the NDPS Ac....
The court granted bail based on the presumption of innocence, noting that the quantity of contraband did not invoke stricter bail provisions.
Bail cannot be denied based on punishment; presumption of innocence prevails unless proven guilty, especially when the contraband does not meet the commercial quantity threshold.
The court ruled that the applicant's possession of a non-commercial quantity of narcotics allows for bail, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the prohibition of pre-trial punishment.
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
