Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Virender Singh, J
Upender Harish – Appellant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
By way of the present application, filed under Section 483 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘BNSS’), applicant-Upender Harish has sought his release, on bail, during the pendency of the trial, in case FIR No.302 of 2024, dated 15.11.2024, registered under Sections 21 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs & Psychotropic Substances Act (hereinafter referred to as the ‘NDPS Act’), with Police Station Sadar, District Hamirpur, H.P.
2. According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case, at the instance of police, for allegedly possessing 5.63 gms of heroin/chitta.
3. Applicant has pleaded that he is also the victim of drugs and has remained admitted in Rehabilitation Centre for a considerable period and as such, for the treatment of his behavioral disorder, he has been taking medicines and therapy from a Psychiatric at Radha Krishna Government Hospital, Hamirpur, H.P.
3.1. To substantiate the said fact, applicant has also annexed his medical record, along with the application.
4. According to the applicant, he had earlier tried his luck by moving similar application, before the Court o
The presumption of innocence remains until conviction, and bail may be granted based on parity with co-accused and absence of commercial quantity of contraband.
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 ruled that the applicant is entitled to bail as the contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, and pre-trial punishment is prohibited.
The presumption of innocence applies in bail applications, and previous unconvicted offenses do not automatically justify denial of bail.
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited, and the presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, allowing bail when investigation is complete and no prior cases exist.
The court ruled that bail cannot be denied as a form of punishment, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the absence of commercial quantity in the contraband case.
The court held that the applicant is entitled to bail as the quantity of contraband does not constitute commercial quantity, thus Section 37 of the NDPS Act is inapplicable, and the presumption of in....
Pre-trial punishment is prohibited; bail granted based on insufficient evidence and prior acquittals.
The presumption of innocence remains until proven guilty, and bail may be granted if the contraband does not meet the definition of commercial quantity under the NDPS Act.
The court held that possession of contraband not classified as commercial quantity allows for bail, emphasizing 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
