Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
Mr Justice Rakesh Kainthla, J
Rohit 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 F.I.R. No. 7 of 2024, dated 20.01.2024 for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 15 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (in short ‘NDPS Act’) registered at Police Station Haroli, District Una, H.P. The petitioner is innocent and was falsely implicated. According to the prosecution, the police received secret information regarding the presence of contraband in the house of Smt. Sunita Devi, who was granted bail on 29.02.2024 by the learned Special Judge-II, Una, District Una, H.P. The quantity of contraband/poppy husk stated to have been recovered in the present case is 15 kg and 190 grams, which is an intermediate quantity, and the rigours of Section 37 of the NDPS Act do not apply to the present case. No recovery was made during the personal search of the petitioner. The petitioner has been behind the bars since 20th January 2024. The investigation is complete, and a charge sheet has been filed before the Court. The petitioner had visited his mother's house, and he resides sep
A subsequent bail application can only be considered if there is a material change in circumstances, as established by judicial precedents.
Bail cannot be granted based on discrepancies in witness statements once the trial has commenced; substantial change in circumstances is required for reconsideration.
Successive NDPS bail applications require material change like trial progress and long incarceration; antecedents not bar if substantial sentence undergone and speedy trial violated. Bail granted des....
Successive bail applications require a material change in circumstances; mere delay in trial does not meet the statutory conditions for bail under Section 37 of the NDPS Act.
Possession of an intermediate quantity of narcotics does not guarantee bail; each case must be assessed on its own facts considering societal implications.
A material change in circumstances is required for reconsideration of bail applications; otherwise, previous denials remain binding.
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....
Bail is granted considering the nature of the accusation, the defendant's status as a first offender, and the absence of risks associated with granting bail, subject to stringent conditions.
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....
Successive NDPS bail applications require material change in circumstances and Section 37 twin conditions satisfaction; prolonged incarceration or recovery suspicions alone insufficient without such ....
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
